UNFAIR  DISTRIBUTION 


OF 


EARNINGS. 


The  Evil  Effects  and  the  Remedy. 


BY 


W.  V.  MARSHALL. 


OSWEGO,  KANSAS. 

..  ,,;886.,  . 


J »    '   '  t  > 


i  >  J 
>  1  ) 
*  >  » 


i  J    >         »  1  >    J  > 


COPYKIGHT,  18S6,  By  W.  V.  MAKSHALL. 


PKESS  OP  GEO.  C.  HACKSTAFI 


c  c 
c      « 


•  ••      J      '     C 

«.  «     •  '    , 

*  t    *      * 


BT.  LOUIS,  MO.    /. 


'etc      c     « 
■^     <    <     I      c    <  t 


^0 


PREFACE. 


All  pretense  to  merit  from  a  literary  stand- 
point is  waived  in  the  presentation  of  this  work 
before  the  public.  I  have  gained  my  object  if 
I  have  succeeded  in  making  understood  the  fol- 
lowing, believed  by  me  to  be,  genuine  facts,  viz: 
That  Uiifair  Distribution  of  Earnings  is  the 

\  true  and  only  cause  of  over-production,   indus- 

rJ  trial  depression  and  "  hard  times." 

^  That  the  primary  agencies  of  unfair  distribu- 
tion are  two : 

1.  Unfair  taxation,  exercised  through  the  in- 
strumentality of  a  false  tax  code. 

2.  Unfair  exchange,  exercised  through  the 
instrumentality  of  monopoly. 

That  a  proper  remedy  consists  of  the  intro- 
duction of  a  fair  system  of  taxation  and  the 
abolition  of  monopolies. 

That  fair  taxation,  while  constituting  of  it- 
self a  remedial  measure,  will  effectuate  the  abol- 
ition of  monopolies. 


;i8BJi52 


11  PREFACE. 

That  what  must  follow  is  independent  enter- 
prise, free  competition  and  the  rapid  advance- 
ment of  society  to  a  state  of  unrestricted  pro- 
gress and  prosperity. 

That  all  must  be  interested  in  the  change 
since  no  class  is  exempt  from  the  deleterious 
influences  of  present  morbid  conditions. 

W.  V.  M. 


CONTENTS. 


Preface,  •  .  •  •  •        * 

Introductory,  :  .  •  •  5 

Over-production,  industrial  depression  and  "hard  times." 

CHAPTER  I. 

Man's  mission  on  earth — Agencies  or  means — Lacks  and  tendencies.    39 

CHAPTER  n. 

Methods  of  wealth  getting — Earnings— No  contradiction— Why  does 
man  mistake  and  encroach? — Erroneoiisness  of  man — Preponderant 
strength  of  self-interest — Nature  of  remedies  considered — Not  de- 
signed to  encroach — Fines  and  penalties — The  proper  way.  57 

CHAPTER  HI. 

Division   of  labor — Powerlessness   to   discover  values  of  earnings — 
Money — Worths    or    values — Capital — Amplification     of    wants — 
Balance  between  capital  and  need  of  it — Fallacious  cause  for  hard    > 
times.  _,---.  88 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Competition— Reward  with  earnings — Supply  and  demand — Over- 
production— Restricted  competition.  -  -  iii 

CHAPTER  V. 

Monopoly — Irresistible  divestment  of  properties  and  priveleges — 
Obligatoriness  of  monopoly— .Advantage  sought.  -  135 


11 


CONTENTS. 


C  HAPTER  VI. 

Wars  and  rumors  of  wars— Standpoint  of  hard  times  reform — Ex- 
actor's standpoint — Standpoint  of  revolt — Finance  of  war — Regu- 
lating the  currency.  -  -      •  •  .  i66 


\ 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Waste  of  human  capabilities,  -  ■ 

CHAP  TER  VIII. 
Combinations  of  capital,  justifiable  and  unjustifiable. 

CHAPTER  IX. 


i8s 


196 


Common  place  fallacies— Born  money  makers— Let  us  see  aright— 
Whom  does  it  hurt  ?— Legitimate  fortunes— Labor  combinations 
— Strikes  and  revengeful  violence— What  they  say. 


207 


A 


.CHAPTER  X: 


The  remedy— Tables— Who  would  pay  the  taxes  ?— The  method  of 
levy— Rate  of  tax  increase— Personal  satisfactions— Incomes- 
Money— Right  of  tax  regulation— Tariff— Labor  and  capital- 
Tax  on  liquors— Who  must  lead.  -  .  231 


Addenda, 

Subsidies. 

Confirmatory  Arguments, 
Selections, 


262 

268 
281 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  substantial  ills  with  which  society  is 
afflicted  are  these  :  Unfair  distribution  and  the 
evils  and  evil  agencies  growing  out  of  unfair  dis- 
tribution as  a  primary  cause. 

By  unfair  distribution,  I  mean  such  a  division 
of  earnings  as  allows  to  some  more  than  is  theirs 
by  right  of  their  own  energy  and  expenditure  of 
means,  the  process  involving  a  denial  to  others 
of  an  equivalent  amount  which  they  have  been 
instrumental  in  bringing  forth.  Here  is  one 
way  in  which  an  unfair  distribution  of  earnings 
may  be  executed:  A  manufacturing  company 
may  pay  less  than  real  worth  for  the  hired  labor 
and  raw  material  used  in  the  manufacture  of  its 
specific  articles  of  sale,  and  charge  and  get  more 
than  real  worth  for  the  manufactured  articles 
when  sold,  producing  the  consequences  that  the 
manufacturing  company  receives  a  greater  share 
of  wealth  than  by  its  industry  and  the  use  of 
its  capital  it  has  legitimately  earned,  while  the 
laborers,  the  furnishers  of  the  raw  products,  and 
the   purchasers  of  the  finished  products  have  so 


6  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

much  wealth  deducted  without  an  equivalent 
given  from  their  earnings.  A  railroad  com- 
pany may  pay  less  for  the  labor  of  others,  and 
for  the  machinery  of  transportation  than  they 
are  worth  and  charge  more  for  their  own  servi- 
ces of  transportation  than  they  are  worth.  This 
giving  to  one  class  or  set  of  persons  more  than 
they  have  earned,  which  can  only  be  done  by 
disallowing  to  others  as  much  as  they  have 
earned  is  attended,  I  am  forced  to  believe, 
with  grave  and  untoward  results,  the  facts  of 
which  I  will  show,  or  cherish  the  belief  that  I 
will,  with  the  double  view  in  hand,  of  convinc- 
ing people  whereat  lies  the  foundation  of  the  ills 
which  oppress  them,  and  of  giving  light  upon 
the  proper  course  to  pursue  for  relief. 

A  prospective  impression  of  the  causes,  meth- 
ods and  consequences  proposed  to  be  examined 
as  phenomena  embraced  in  unfair  distribution 
and  its  relations,  will  be  of  help  to  an  understand- 
ing of  the  subject,  and  can  be  conveyed  as  well, 
as  in  any  other  way,  by  the  employment  of  a 
few  ideal  illustrations: 

The  Great  Wall  Street  and  Peoples  Railroad, 
I  will  say,  is  projected  to  extend  through  a  cer- 
tain section  of  the  Union.  The  projectors  resort 
to  the  usual  custom  of  asking  for  aid.  They 
get  it.  Possibly  the  National  Government  aids 
them  with  landed  donations  and  in  the  procure- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  7 

ment  of  funds.  State  aid  of  a  similar  kind  is 
given  them,  and  the}'  get  aid  along  the  projected 
route  in  the  settled  districts  from  cities,  towns, 
counties,  townships  and  private  citizens,  in  the 
way  of  bond  issues,  land  and  money  donations, 
and  other  help. 

The  amounts  provided  by  all  or  any  of-  these 
different  forms  of  aid,  positively  in  the  gift  of 
means  to  meet  expenditures,  negatively  in  the 
gift  of  reliefs  from  necessity  to  undergo  expendi- 
ture, form  a  magnificent  basis  avaihil^le  for  con- 
struction and  equipment  purposes  and  the  credit 
necessary  to  complete. 

When  after  the  receipt  of  such  aid  and  the 
lapse  of  time  the  road  is  completed,  by  all  the 
rules  commonly  governing  in  such  cases  the  pro- 
jectors are  the  leading  owners;  and  having  from 
that  fact  the  balance  of  control,  they  usually 
make  use  of  the  advantage  to  secure,  at  a  trifling 
cost  to  themselves  by  means  of  dark  integrity'',, 
whatever  interests  the  people  may  have  reserved 
in  the  property  during  the  time  of  its  develop- 
ment. 

What  follows.-*  Full  proprietors,  and  wholly 
undeterred  by  any  menaces  that  exist  in  law 
or  elsewhere,  they  turn  to  and  run  the  road 
as  it  if  were  an  instrument  provided  solely 
for  their  own  rapid  and  grand  self-enrichment. 
They  proceed  as  if  they   never,  took   thought 


8  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

that  the  road  was  ever  designed  by  any  one  for 
any  other  purpose  than  their  self-enrichment,  and 
they  conduct  it  as  if  that  were  the  sole  need  of  it. 
B}-  their  system  of  alliances  with  other  roads, 
and  over-charging,  and  use  of  the  road  in  gene- 
ral to  foster  the  private  interests  of  themselves 
instead  of  the  public  interests  of  the  founders, 
they  add  to  their  exchequer  every  3'ear  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  dollars  above  what  is  a  fair 
remuneration  for  their  services  and  a  fair  profit 
upon  the  capital  employed,  assuming  their  right 
to  profit  upon  capital  which  has  been  donated  to 
them. 

Such  practice  illustrates  how  we  are  repaid 
for  the  favors  we  bestow.  Having  been  induced 
to  relinquish  large  blocks  of  our  wealth  into  the 
hands  of  a  few  individuals  we  are  rewarded  by 
its  being  ever  afterward  used  for  the  swindle 
and  oppression  of  us. 

Another  illustration:  The  manufacturers  of 
three-profits — a  name  which  I  use  for  conven- 
ienc}',  but  which  is  applicable  to  many  manufac- 
tured articles  of  special  utility — are  capitalists  of 
great  wealth  and  thrift.  Years  ago  the  leading 
men  in  that  business  met  in  secret  council  to 
take  into  consideration  the  advancement  of  their 
interests  b}^  the  adoption  of  methods  looking  to 
improvement  in  the  manufacture,  sale,  business 
conduct  and  legislative   enactments  relative  to 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  9 

three-profits.  At  this  meeting  they  agreed  upon 
a  general  plan  of  concerted  action  and  manage- 
ment which  had  for  its  object  the  control  of  the 
business  of  three-profits  in  such  manner  as  to 
enable  them  to  regulate  the  supply,  destroy  com- 
petition, set  their  own  prices  upon  the  labor  and 
raw  material  which  they  engaged  and  to  charge 
what  they  might  see  fit  for  the  finished  article. 
By  union  of  action  they  succeeded  in  their  pur- 
poses and  they  now  are,  as  they  long  have  been, 
masters  of  the  situation.  They  are  sole  dealers, 
sole  dictators  of  terms,  and  will  not  brook  oppo- 
sition. The  public  is  compelled  to  patronize 
them  or  go  without.  Three-profit  mechanics 
must  work  for  them  upon  such  terms  as  are 
allowed  or  quit  the  trade,  and  producers  of  the 
raw  materials  must  sell  to  the  combination  for 
such  prices  as  they  can  get  or  not  sell  at  all.  Td 
keep  out  native  competition  the  combined  three- 
profit  manufactures  glut  the  markets  in  the 
vicinity  where  a  new  factory  has  started  up  at 
such  a  temporary  low  price  as  to  ruin  the  new 
enterprise  and  force  it  out  of  existence.  To  keep 
out  foreign  competition  they  secure  the  enact- 
ment of  tariff  laws  forcing  foreign  manufactures 
to  pay  a  large  price  for  the  privilege  if  they  ship 
any  three-profit  goods  into  this  ~  countr}-.  As  a 
result  their  wealth  is  increasing,  as  it  long  has 


:> 


lO  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

increased,  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  increase  of 
a  just  and  fair  profit. 

This  is  a  picture  of  the  consolidating  and  mon- 
opolizing methods  of  the  present  day,  permitted 
and  fostered  by  a  faulty  S3'stem  of  taxation. 

Again,  hi  the  province  of  Wealthy-few  the 
people  are  divided  into  two  classes,  the  Opulent 
and  the  Common.  A  double  method  of  taxation 
there  prevails,  the  direct  and  the  indirect.  By 
the  direct  method  the  money  which  is  demanded 
for  public  needs  is  paid  directly  from  the  hands 
of  the  contributors  into  the  hands  of  the  collec- 
tors. The  direct  tax  levies  are  putatively  ap- 
portioned according  to  worths  of  properties. 
In  practice  it  is  anything  else  than  according  to 
worths  of  properties,  since  by  schemes  of  under- 
valuation, exemption  and  evasion,  the  rich 
Opulents  manage  to  throw  the  burden  of  tax- 
ation upon  the  common  class  of  people.  The  in- 
direct tax  is  paid  by  the  people  of  this  province 
when  they  buy  most  or  all  of  manufactured 
goods,  the}^  paying  each  time  they  make 
a  purchase  a  certain  excess  above  what 
they  would  have  to  pay  were  there  no  indi- 
rect tax.  The  goods  upon  which  this  tax  is 
collected  are  of  both  foreign  and  domestic  man- 
ufactures. The  tax  upon  the  foreign  goods  is 
collected  for  the  benefit  of  the  government;  that 
upon  the  domestic  goods  is  collected  for  the  ben- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 1 

efit  of  the  domestic  manufacturers,  the  Opulents. 
Those  wlio  bring  in  the  foreign  goods  advance 
the  tax  to  the  government  when  the  goods  are 
brought  in.  They  are  then  so  much  out  of 
pocket  for  the  benefit  of  the  people.  They  get 
reimbursement  by  charging  enough  when  they 
sell  their  goods  to  make  up  for  the  government 
tax  they  have  advanced. 

Domestic  manufacturers,  Opulents,  get  their 
tax  by  adding  to  the  regular  profit  price  of  their 
goods  enough  to  make  their  price  equal  the 
price  importers  sell  at  to  make  up  for  the  gov- 
ernment tax  which  they  pay.  This  double 
source  of  revenue — first,  the  regular  profit  upon 
their  goods;  secondly,  the  tax  collected  from  the 
purchasers  of  their  goods,  has  given,  and  goes 
on  giving,  astonishing  riches  to  the  manufactur- 
ing Opulents  of  Wealthy-few.  Add,  that  by 
schemes  of  evasion  these  fellows  escape  the 
payment  of  a  large  share  of  what  would  be 
under  the  law  their  direct  tax,  and  who, 
seeing  as  men  see  now,  would  not  be  an  or- 
thodox Opulent  of  Wealthy-few.'' 

The  common  people  in  that  land  do  not  get 
to  taste  much  of  the  enjoyments  flowing  from 
wealth,  for  the  Opulents,  having  great  influence 
at  the  law  making  centers,  get  import  duties  so 
gauged  as  to  give  them  well  nigh  the  exclusive 
liome  trade  in   their   specific  lines    of   business, 


12  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

whence  they  are  enabled  to  so  over-charge  and 
under-pay  as  to  gather  up  about  all  the  wealth 
that  is  produced  above  what  is  needed  for  the 
plain  subsistence  of  the  common  people.  While 
the  Opulents  of  Wealthy-few  can  keep  their  peo- 
ple in  the  present  way  of  thinking,  as  regards 
both  the  direct  and  indirect  methods  of  taxation 
there  pursued,  they  will,  as  they  look  at  it,  be 
most  admirably  circumstanced.  They  will  be 
supreme  against  the  molestations  of  large  man- 
ufacturers abroad  and  against  the  inroads  of 
infant  manufacturers  at  home.  For  while  im- 
port duties  protect  them  from  being  over- 
whelmed by  more  powerful  competitors  of  for- 
eign nations,  no  similar  law  of  taxation  prevents 
them  from  overwhelming  infant  concerns  which 
attempt  to  compete  with  them  within  the  bounds 
of  their  own  nation. 

This  shows  what  is  practically  the  form  and 
workings  of  part  of  our  system  of  taxation. 

These  illustrations  will  serve  to  exemplify  in 
the  rough,  the  mistakenness  of  some  of  our  poli- 
cies and  practices  and  what  is  the  character  of 
some  of  the  unjustifiable  methods  employed  by 
designing  men  for  self  preferment,  though  not 
all.  Other  methods  will  be  noticed  as  the  de- 
velopment of  the  subject  brings  them  into  relief. 

I  may  here  state  that  unfair  distribution  is  not 
something   peculiar   to   the   age.      In  all  prior 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 3 

times  of  which  history  treats,  it  has  been  the 
case  that  the  citizens  of  one  country  as  against 
those  of  another  countr}',  or  a  portion  of  the 
citizens  as  against  the  rest  in  their  own  country, 
have  contrived  to  get  at  and  enrich  themselves 
from  accumulations  the}'  have  not  themselves 
earned.  We  are  advised  that  savao^es  have 
invaded  fellow  tribes,  clubbed  and  plundered 
them,  then  feasted  upon  the  booty  gained.  That 
chiefs  have  arbitrarily  appropriated  the  lands  of 
their  own  subjects  or  those  of  conquered  nations, 
then  robbed  the  tillers  of  it  through  exhorbitant 
rent  charges.  That  members  of  one  race  have 
captured  those  of  another,  reduced  them  to  ser- 
vitude, then  subsisted  upon  the  surplus  fruits  of 
their  labors.  These  are  simply  the  records  of 
methods  popular  in  their  time  and  place  for  the 
execution  of  unfair  distribution.  These  methods 
we  are  now  prone  to  look  upon  as  methods  of 
v'o'ence  and  robbery,  the  authors  of  them  as 
t3Tants  and  plunderers,  the  objects  of  them  as 
victims  who  were  forced  to  succumb  and  deliver. 
Such  rude  methods  for  the  subjection  and  plun- y 
der  of  a  people,  the  more  highly  civilized  inhab-— 7 
itants  of  the  globe  will  not  now  tolerate.  Those  ^ 
who  do  now  profit  at  the  expense  of  their  fellow- 
men  have  been  constrained  into  the  selection  and 
use  of  methods  more  refined  and  less  shocking. 
But  though  the  execution  of  unfair  distribution 


14  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

is  conducted  in  a  manner  less  shocking,  it  is 
none  the  less,  on  that  account,  the  robbery  of 
men  by  men.  Nor  does  the  refinement  of  the 
business  make  it  the  less  objectionable  since  the 
effects  are  just  as  harsh  and  hard  to  bear. 

But  because  the  business  of  plundering  has  not 
changed  as  man  has  marched  forward  and  up- 
ward, except  in  the  manner  of  pursuing  it,  we 
are  not  to  infer  that  the  business  will  never 
cease,  and  so  have  all  hopes  in  us  for  the  better- 
ment of  the  condition  of  man  made  naught. 
Considerations  are  sufficient,  as  shall  be  observed 
upon  hereafter,  to  assure  us  that  man  will  even- 
tually rise  to  the  capacity  to  see  all  that  relates 
to  the  evil  of  unfair  distribution,  among  other 
things  the  way  to  an  entire  banishment  of  the 
evil. 

In  my  opinion  the  basic  or  foundation  methods 
by  which  unfair  distribution  is  popularly  execu- 
ted at  the  present  day  in  our  country  are — 

First — Unfair  Taxation. 

Second — Unfair  Exchange. 

I  call  these  the  foundation  methods,  because  it 
has  been  by  getting  on  the  advantageous  side  of 
them  that  intrio^uers  have  laid  the  foundation  for< 
the  inflow  of  the  wherewithal  they  subsequently 
employ  to  invest  in  our  homestead  possessions,  or 
incumbrances  against  them,  for  the  purpose  of 
reaping  additional  profit  from  us  in  rent  and  in- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 5 

terest.  If  we  apply  to  and  get  rectitude  in  these 
fundamental  methods  of  dispensing  wealth,  rec- 
titude in  the  others  will  follow  as  matters  of  in- 
evitable consequence  or  march  of  event. 

We  have  unfair  taxation.  Taxes  are,  or  should 
be,  solicited  and  contributed  to  meet  those  expen- 
ditures for  the  need  and  benefit  of  us  which  must 
from  the  nature  and  necessities  of  society  as  a 
body,  be  publicly  incurred.  For  one  party  to 
evade  payment  of  his  proper  share  of  such  requis. 
ite  expenditure  is  but  to  cause  another  or  others 
to  pay  the  unsatisfied  portion  for  him. 

Such  evasion  and  shouldering  upon  others 
what  one  himself  should  bear  is  a  proceeding 
in  nowise  different  in  its  nature  and  production 
of  effects  from  the  art  of  taking  advantage,  one 
of  another,  in  a  deal  or  trade. 

Unfair  exchange  is  executed  through  the  in- 
strumentality of  monopolies,  those  having  the 
monopoly  of  any  business  or  occupation  having 
it  in  their  power  to  dictate  terms  of  their  own 
making  to  both  buyers  and  sellers  dealing  with 
them.  Unfair  taxation,  such  as  we  have,  is  a 
promoter  of  monopoly.  It  does  not  conduce  to 
the  perpetuation  of  industries  in  disconnected, 
competitive  and  independently  working  wholes, 
but  encourages  the  aggregation  of  them  into 
consolidated  concerns  under  single  and  non-com- 


1 6  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION 

petitive  managements.       In  this   form  the}'  are 
creative  of  unbounded  mischief. 

Fair  taxation  would  be  of  double  good.  First, 
those  who  paid  tdxes  would  have  justice  done 
them.  Secondly,  it  would  discourage  combina- 
tions and  give  to  independent  and  rising  industries 
strength  to  defend  and  continue  themselves, 
whence  would  follow  good.  When  we  had  fair 
taxation  we  would  have  the  provision  which 
secures  us  industrial  liberty;  when  we  had  in- 
dustrial liberty,  man  would,  impelled  by  his 
nature,  work  out  and  maintain  the  solid  welfare 
of  himself. 

So  much  upon  methods.  Let  us  go  ahead  and 
outline  some  of  the  results  of,  and  the  manner 
of  the  connection  of  these  results  with,  unfair 
distribution. 

OVER-PRODUCTION,  INDUSTRIAL  DEPRESSION 
AND  "HARD  TIMES." 

Readers  are  familiar  with  the  fact  that  we  are 
treated  every  few  years  with  an  interval  of  stag- 
nation in  business  and  industry  which  is  charac- 
terized by  intense  want  among  a  large  portion 
of  the  population,  while  the  country  abounds  in 
such  a  plenty  that  the  possessors  do  not  know 
what  to  do  with  their  stores.  Overstocked 
mills  and  factories    evervwhere    are  •  closed  for 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 7 

want  of  orders,  when  thousands  upon  thousands 
of  people  all  over  the  countr}*  are  in  distressive 
need  of  the  ver}'  things  which  are  therein  pro- 
duced. Nobod}'  seems  to  want  to  buy  although 
ever3-bod3'  is  intensel}'  anxious  to  sell.  The 
hungry  laborer  cannot  trade  his  labor  for  pro- 
duce, for  his  labor  would  worse  the  condition  of 
things  by  the  production  of  more.  Overproduc- 
tion of  the  needs  of  life  is  just  what  the  trouble  is. 
Yet  for  the  reason  that  we  have  over-produc- 
tion we  have  the  living  in  a  state  of  pinched  neces- 
sity and  distress,  the  larger  portion  of  our 
population.  This  must  appear  to  many  strange. 
Something  must  appear  to  them  to  get  out  of 
joint.  The  question  naturally  occurs:  how  is  it 
that  the  yield  of  the  earth  and  of  toil  gets  piled 
up  unsold,  unused  and  unsought  for  while  so 
many  are  in  such  dire  distress  from  need  of  it 
and  owners  are  so  willing  to  sell,  but  cannot.^ 
What  is  the  nature  of  the  monster  that  lodges 
itself  in  our  midst  by  spells,  and  causes  every- 
thinsf  to  come  to  a  stand  still,  and  this  in  the  face 
of  ever}'  willingness  of  the  people  to  act  and 
ever}'  readiness  of  the  wheels  and  implements  of 
industry  to  be  set  in  motion. 

The  answer  is  to  be  found  in  a  study  of  the 
effects  of  unfair  distribution  or  that  misdivision 
of  earnings  which  gives  continuously  to  one  class 
shares  that  another  should  have.     The  following 


1 8  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

illustration  will  demonstrate  the  development  of 
these  effects: 

-  The  Island  of  Notseen,  we  will  imagine,  con- 
tains a  population  of  one  thousand  able  bodied 
men,  who,  with  their  families,  form  an  isolated 
and  self-sustaining  community.  All  of  these 
men  sustain  the  relationship  of  employing  pro- 
prietors and  employed,  in  the  ratio  of  50  of  the 
former  to  950  of  the  latter.  All  the  wants  of 
the  community  are  supplied  by  the  management 
and  industry  of  these  one  thousand  men.  But 
50  of  these  men  employ  the  other  950,  and  pay 
them  wages,  so  that  the  subsistence  produced 
by  the  1 000  men  is  first  owned  by  the  employing 
proprietors,  who  dispense  it  into  the  community 
in  manner  as  merchants  sells  goods. 

We  will  imagine  that  the  community  produces 
commodities  averaging  in  amount  $2,000  worth 
per  day  ;  that  the  workmen  get  $1.50  per  day,  a 
rate  of  wages  enabling  the  lot  of  950  to  pur- 
chase an  average  of  $1,425  worth  of  commodities 
daily.  Then  $575.00  worth  becomes  the  daily 
average  share  of  the  employers.  Let  us  sup- 
pose that  this  $575  worth  just  suffices  to  supply 
the  employers  with  all  their  personal  wants  upon 
the  island,  and  to  provide  them  with  the  capital 
they  must  join  with  the  efforts  of  themselves  and 
workman  to  produce  the  $2,000  daily  earnings. 
We  have  before  us,  then,  a  case  of  happy  adjust- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 9 

ment  of  rev/ard  with  earnings  all  around,  in 
which  the  process  of  production  and  consump- 
tion are  equalized — in  which  the  commodities 
produced  in  the  community  will  go  as  fast  as 
they  are  prepared,  and  the  people  will  be  kept 
continuously  busy  in  forming  a  new  supply. 

Assuming  the  adjustment  here  marked  out  to 
be  the  one  suited  to  exactly  maintain  equilli- 
brium  between  supply  and  demand  in  this  case, 
let  us  see  what  v/ill  take  place  under  a  change 
of  adjustment.  Suppose  the  employing  proprie- 
tors of  Notseen  to  go  at  and  reduce  the  wages  of 
their  workman  to  $1.25  per  day,  without  reduc- 
ing the  scope  of  their  operations,  or  the  prices  of 
their  commodities  :  the  workman  then  will  be 
able  to  purchase  daily,  with  their  wages,  only 
$1187.50  worth  of  goods  or  five-sixths  as  much 
as  they  did  before,  causing  there  to  be  left  of  their 
earnings,  one-sixth,  or  a  sum  equal  to  $237.50 
worth  dail}',  in  the  hands  of  the  proprietors  as 
a  gain  or  bonus  to  the  latter. 

Now,  let  us  keep  in  sight  of  this  gain  or  bonus 
and  learn  what  use  is  made  of  it  or  how  it  dis- 
poses of  itself. 

The  first  fact  we  are  made  cognizant  of  is 
this:  the  gain  slums  ready  use  or  consumption. 
It  is  not  turned  to  the  speedy  benefit  of  anybody 
like  products  that  are  not  gains.  At  first  blush 
this  affirmation   may  not  appear  correct,  but  we 


20  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

shall  soon  prove  the  truth  of  it.     We  readily  un- 
derstand that  the  workmen  cannot  make  speedy 
use  of  this  gain  because  they  cannot  purchase  it 
with  current  wages.     Their  wage  income  is  ex- 
hausted upon  the   expenditure,  by  each  of  them 
of  $1.25  per  day,  or  by  all  of  them  of  $1187.50 
per  da3\     They  would    have  to  expend  $1425 
per  day  to   secure   the    $237.50    worth    gained 
away  from  them  by  the  cut  wages,  but  this  they 
cannot   do  out  of  a  wage   income  of  $1.25   per 
da3^     So  we  see  that  inability  to  purchase  pre- 
vents the  workmen  from  making  ready  use  of  it. 
But  why  does  this  gain  fail  to  admit  of  ready 
use  by  the  proprietors.     Because  provision  exis- 
ted prior  to  the  cut  in  wages  for  full  supply  of 
all  their  regularly  accruing  wants,  both  personal 
and  capital,  in  consequence  of  which  no  avenue 
of  need  afterward  existed   into  which   could  be 
immediately  projected  this  newly  gotten  gain. 
Increased  extravagance  of  living  on  the  part  of 
the  proprietors  would  serve  for  the  making  way 
with  some  of  the  gain,  but  the  proprietors  being 
in  numbers  few,  and   the  gain  in  the  aggregate 
large,  the   greatest  extravagance    they    are  in- 
clined to  indulge  in  suffices  for  the   consumption 
and  extinguishment  of  but  a  small  portion  of  it. 
They  can  use  none  of  it  profitably  as  capital,  it 
must   not   be   forgotten,   since  having   abridged 
th  e  purchasing  power  of  the  great  body  of  their 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  21 

customers  b}^  the  cut  in  wages,  they  have  need 
to  decrease  their  capital  emplo3'ed  in  production 
rather  than  to  increase  it. 

The  gain  is  not  readily  consumed,  because 
the  getters  of  it  have  no  need  of  it,  and  the 
losers  of  it  cannot  purchase  it. 

To  the  question  of  what  use  is  made  of  this 
gain,  we  must  answer  in  view  of  the  facts  just 
given,  that  no  material  use  is  made  of  it  at  the 
start. 

To  the  question  of  how  does  it  dispose  of  it- 
self, the  answer  is,  that  following  the  customary 
order  of  disposing  itself  this  gain  for  awhile  sim- 
ply accumulates — because  it  is  unusable  on  the 
one  hand  and  unpurchasable  on  the  other  hand 
by  regular  methods,  it  sets  itself  to  piling  up  in 
the  bins  and  shelves  of  store  houses. 

So  far  we  have  traced  this  gain  and  are  re- 
warded b}'  finding'  that  it  sets  itself  to  accumu- 
lating. Presentl}'  we  will  be  made  acquainted 
with  a  familiar  completed  development.  The 
accumulation  goes  on  until  the  proprietors  of 
Notseen  have  their  store  houses  stocked  to  suf- 
focacy  with  everything  the  people  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  producing  and  consuming.  That 
condition  of  things  is  popularly  know  as  "over- 
production," and  the  reader  is  advised  that  the 
over-production  here  traced  up  to,  is  over-pro- 
duction from  the  onl}-  cause  which  ever  leads  to 


2  2  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION 

general  over-production  of  the  needs  of  life, 
namely,  unfair  distribution,  or  the  practice  of 
profiting,  class  at  the  expense  of  class. 

Unfair  distribution,  the  only  cause  of  general 
over-production,  leads  inevitably  to  general  over- 
production as  one  of  its  most  eminent  effects. 
Deny  a  class  of  a  portion  of  it  earnings,  and  all 
that  portion  except  what  ma}^  be  used  up  by  the 
getters  of  it  in  extra  extravagances,  piles  up. 
Those  from  whom  it  is  gotten  are  forced  to  re- 
duce themselves  to  greater  meagerness  of  living. 
Tliese  are  some  of  the  first  effects,  though  not  all 
nor  the  most,  as  we  are  upon  the  verge  of  discov- 
ering. 

The  over-stock  of  commodities  in  Notseen, 
consequent  upon  the  greedy  action  of  the  pro- 
prietors, having  assumed  proportions  be3^ond 
which  the  proprietors  care  not  to  let  them  fur- 
ther expand,  other  events  rapidly  follow.  The 
first  in  order  of  these  is  the  adoption  of  meas- 
ures by  the  proprietors  for  the  check  and  de- 
crease of  over-production.  The  execution  of 
these  measures  consist  in  the  closing  down  of 
industries,  the  discharge  of  the  workmen  and 
the  refusal  to  them  of  further  chance  to  gain  a 
Hving  by  work  at  their  customary  vocations. 

After  this  there  appear  and  reign  the  events 
known    as     "industrial     depression"   and    "hard 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  23 

times."  Xliese  follow  in  rapid  succession  after 
the  full  development  of  over-production. 

"Over-production"  needs  no  further  descrip- 
tion for  us  to  have  an  idea  of  what  it  is.  "In- 
dustrial depression"  we  know  to  be  the  torpor 
of  trade  and  industr}'  occasioned  by  the  stoppage 
of  operations.  Of  what  sort  is  the  experience 
of   "hard  times." 

Keeping  at  our  illustrations,  it  is  the  experi- 
ence of  discouraging  trials  and  hard  luck,  joined 
with  impoverishment  and  distress,  attendant 
upon  the  men  in  their  endeavors,  during  the 
season  of  industrial  depression,  to  maintain  soul 
and  body  together.  For  though  the  men  may 
be  forced  to  desist  from  earning  further  subsis- 
tence, the  physical  systems  of  themselves  and 
famihes  do  not  cease  to  demand  support. 

Common  experience  teaches  us  what  is  the 
succession  of  events  that  will  occur  through  the 
period  of  hard  times.  After  their  discharge  the 
men  subsist  so  long  as  they  can  upon  the  means 
they  have  been  enabled  to  lay  by.  Their  means 
gone,  they  seek  out  their  emplo3^ers  and  beg  to 
be  allowed  to  resume  work  for  the  further  sup- 
port of  themselves  and  families.  Comformably 
to  rule,  their  petition  fails  of  success.  The  em- 
ployes are  not  only  denied  labor,  but  are  usually 
accused  of  shortsightedness  and  blamed  for  their 
condition  in   language  not  out  of  such  fashion  as 


24  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

• 

this:  "No,  you  should  see  that  thcn-e  is  a  plen- 
ty of  the  means  of  support.  You  must  suffer 
the  consequences  of  3^our  folly.  Had  you  been 
less  extravagant  and  shiftless  in  the  past  you 
would  not  now  be  without  means  to  purchase  a 
living."  To  this  the  petitioners  might  very  con- 
vincingly retort,  "  How  is  it  possible  to  purchase 
the  whole  of  a  thing  with  less  money  than  its 
real  worth.''  Had  we  saved  with  unexampled 
care  would  that  have  left  in  our  hands  means  to 
purchase  the  sixth  3'ou  gained  away  from  us 
when  you  reduced  our  wages  twenty-five  cents 
on  the  day."  A  repl}^  characteristic  of  the  kind 
usually  given  to  terminate  said  conferences  is: 
''It  is  not  our  business  to  engage  in  arguments 
with  you;  we  understand  how  to  conduct  our 
affairs,  and  desire  neither  your  importunity  nor 
your  advice." 

After  this  petition  and  colloquy,  which  is 
caused  to  take  place  out  of  sheer  desperation  in 
the  men  rather  than  from  any  hope  they  harbor 
of  succeeding  in  a  sort  of  attempt  that  they,  can 
not  but  know  will  fail,  the  next  event  transpires. 
This  event  is  the  reluctant  impairment  by  the 
workmen  of  their  homesteads.  They  are  forced 
to  part  with  their  home  properties — accumulated 
previous  to  the  era  of  exaction — in  such  quan- 
tities and  upon  such  terms  as  they  can,  or  to 
encumber  them,  in  order  to  get  the  wherewithal 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  25 

to  live  upon.  To  sell  or  to  mortgage  pre-earned 
possessions  was  in  reality  the  only  thing  left  the 
workman  to  do,  the  only  recourse  left  open  to 
them  for  the  getting  of  a  living  in  fact,  after 
their  emplo3-ers  had  closed  down  and  promul- 
ofated  the  dicta  that  the  stock  in  hand  must  be 
reduced  before  more  should  be  produced;  and  if 
it  were  done  after  every  imaginable  struggle 
to  avoid  it,  it  had  to  be  done  before  there  could 
be  a  return  to  industrialism  and  "good  times." 

Those  who  have  no  properties  to  yield  up  on 
these  occasions,  or  have  yielded  up  all  and  are 
still  in  want  before  the  close  of  the  period,  must 
beg  or  steal,  and  in  consequence  get  themselves 
lodged  in  pauper  shops  or  prison  pens. 

Such  experiences  as  these  contain  the  gist  of 
what  is  meant,  when  we  speak  of  "hard  times." 
They  are  the  peculiarly  disagreeable  experiences 
joined  with  the  vanishment  of  accumulated  gains. 

They  are  the  more  remote  and  harsh  effects 
of  unfair  distribution.  The  denial  to  the  em- 
ployes of  Notseen  of  their  full  wages  allowed 
them  to  live  less  bounteousl}'  upon  $1.25  per 
day.  Now,  for  the  dissipation  of  the  resulting 
over-production,  industries  are  closed  down  and 
they  arc  denied  the  chance  of  getting  any  sort  of 
a  living,  except  as  they  surrender  pre-earned 
possessions  in  exchange  for  it,  beg  or  steal  it,  or 
liave  it   furnished  them  as  paupers  or  criminals. 


26  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

It  is,  indeed,  experiencing  hard  times  when  will- 
ing hands  are  not  peimitted  to  satisfy  the  crav- 
ing stomach  by  industry,  when  one  is  forced  to 
part  with  the  accumulations  of  his  former  toil 
out  of  dire  necessity,  and  when  a  victim  is  sen- 
tenced to  pay  the  penalty  of  pauperism  or  crime 
because  he  has  not  disobeyed  the  injunction  of 
nature  to  preserve  life,  and  given  himself  up  to 
starve. 

This  I  will  let  sufRce  for  the  dispensing  of 
an  idea  of  the  methods  and  results  of  unfair 
distribution,  with  the  hope  that  it  will  find  its 
use  in  making  easier  to  understand  what  is  to 
follow. 


In  what  has  gone  before  the  ill  experiences  are 
given  as  borne  by  employes  for  the  sake  of  sim- 
plicity and  not  because  it  is  held  that  hired 
laborers  alone  suffer  from  unfair  distribution. 
The  evil  effects  of  unfair  distribution  are  visited 
upon  everybody,  the*  ordinary  farmers,  mer- 
chants, manufacturers  and  upon  those  who  are  the 
recipients  of  the  earnings  extorted  from  the 
common  people.  An  unfair  distribution  of  earn- 
ings, no  difference  how  made,  whether  through 
unfair  taxation  or  unfair  price,  or  otherwise, 
affects  society  in  the  same  disastrous  man- 
ner.    At     the      expense    of     some    repetition. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  27 

this  part  of  the  introduction  being  written 
since  the  writing  of  the  balance  of  the  work, 
I  will  give  some  more  of  the  events  growing  out 
of  unfair  distribution.  Again  for  sake  of  simplicity 
I  will  treat  them  from  the  single  stand-point  of 
unfair  exchange  through  the  instrumentalit}^ 
of  monopoly. 

First.  The  authors  of  monopoly  force  a 
system  of  self-denial  and  stupor  of  trade  upon 
the  balance  of  society. 

Those  who  combine  industries  into  the 
form  of  monopoly  carry  out  the  purposes 
of  their  combinations  by  over-charging  for 
the  commodities  and  services  which  they 
sell,  and  under-paying  for  the  commod- 
ities and  services  which  they  buy.  The 
effect  of  this  practice  is  to  leave  the  balance  of 
society  less  than  the  full  share  of  its  earnings. 
If  the  people  who  compose  the  balance  of  societ}^ 
are  deprived  of  a  share  of  their  earnings,  then, 
they  must  do  with  less  of  the  means  of  welfare 
than  full  earnings  will  buy  and  less  business  must 
be  done  to  satisfy  common  demands.  The  peo- 
ple must  do  with  fewer  and  poorer  houses,  barns 
and  fences,  and  lumber  and  hardware  merchants 
must  sell  less  lumber,  nails  and  building  material. 
The  people  must  do  with  fewer  suits  and 
dresses,  and  clothing  and  dry  goods  merchants 
must  sell  less  garment  and  drapery  stuffs.      The 


.28  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION 

people  must  skimp  in  the  kind  and  variety  of 
their  food,  and  flour  dealers  and  grocery  men 
must  do  a  poorer  trade,  butchers  must  sell  fess 
meat,  farmers  less  wheat  and  fat  steers,  and 
gardeners  less  garden  truck.  The  people  must 
cut  short  in  their  pleasures  and  enjoyments,  and 
dealers  in  carriages  and  musical  instruments 
must  do  only  half  the  business  they  might  have 
done  had  the  public  been  allowed  to  retain  the 
full  share  of  their  winnings.  In  short,  if  only  a 
fraction  of  earnings  is  left  with  the  balance  of 
society,  then  the  balance  of  society  can  only  en- 
joy a  fraction  of  earnings  and  tradesmen  can  have 
only  a  fraction  of  trade  with  its  profits.  This 
is  self-denial  and  stupor  of  trade. 

If  this  self-denial  and  stupor  of  trade  served 
any  good  purpose  whatever  to  the  monopolists 
there  might  be  some  justification  for  its  enforce- 
ment ;  but  it  does  not,  as  will  be  made  presently 
to  appear. 

Second.  The  authors  of  monopoly  indulge  in 
useless  piling  up  of  products.  The  piling  up  of 
products  occurs  from  this  fact.  I  have  stated 
that  the  authors  of  monopoly  force  a  system  of 
self-denial  upon  all  the  rest  of  society.  What 
does  this  system  of  self-denial  mean  ?  It  means 
that  the  balance  of  society  do  not  consume  the 
full  amount  of  their  earnings.  What  do  those 
earnings    consist  of  ?     They    consist  of  the  pro- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  29 

ducts  of  their  effort — the  kimber,  food,  clothing 
and  every  thing  else  produced  for  the  satisfac- 
tion of  man.  The  balance  of  society  consumes 
but  a  part  of  their  earnings,  because  the  monopo- 
lists set  such  prices  for  them  in  their  dealings 
with  them  as  to  allow  them  opportunity  to  get 
but  a  part  of  their  earnings.  The  earnings 
which  the  balance  of  society  does  not  consume, 
must  then  pile  up. 

But,  says  one,  cannot  the  monopolists  con- 
sume them.^  Certainly  not.  Their  own  bona 
fide  earnings,  the  part  which  would  be  left  them 
if  there  was  a  fair  deal^  suffices  for  their  con- 
sumption, both  of  personal  and  capital  wants. 
This,  which  they  get  b}'  overcharging  and  un- 
derpaying, is  a  gciin^  something  that  falls  into 
their  possession  over  and  above  the  ho?ia  fide 
earnings  which  they  themselves  make.  The}' 
may  and  do  make  way  with  some  of  these  gains 
by  indulging  in  extravagancies,  but  they  cannot? 
with  the  utmost  extravagance,  make  way  with 
all  their  gains,  their  number  being  too  small  as 
compared  with  the  number  they  are  gaining 
from.  It  is  probable  that  fifty  thousand  would 
include  the  number  of  monopolists  in  the  United 
States.  An  even  estimate  of  the  balance  of 
earners  is  twent}'  million  persons.  If  these  fifty 
thousand  monopolists  gained  an  average  of  25 
cents  per  day  from   each  of  the  twenty  million 


30  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

earners,  it  would  give  to  each  of  the  monopolists 
above  his  own  legitimate  earnings,  a  gained  sum 
equalling  upon  the  average,  $ioo  per  day,  or 
$30,000  per  year.  This  large  sum  they  cannot 
consume  in  addition  to  their  own  legitimate  earn- 
ings, and  it  is  not  probable  that  their  gains  are 
even  as  small  as  this  sum. 

This  gain  must  pile  up  and  take  the  name 
that  it  is  commonly  known  by,  which  is,  "  Over- 
production." Over-production  consists  as  follows : 
On  hand,  of  the  monopolists'  own  make,  pro- 
ducts which  would  not  have  been  left  on  then- 
hands  had  they  let  their  wares  go  at  earned  val- 
uations; in  the  possession  of  the  monopolists,  by 
actual  or  debt  claim,  of  the  peoples'  make,  pro- 
ducts which  they  would  not  have  got  had  they 
taken  in  the  peoples'  wares  at  earned  valua- 
tions. 

Over-production  always  stands  opposed  to 
scarcity.  That  is,  because  over-production  and 
scarcity  have  one  and  the  same  cause.  When 
you  rob  20,000,000  citizens  of  a  large  share 
of  their  earnings,  then  we  must  hear  the  com- 
plaint of  scarcity.  When  you  turn  these  earn- 
ings over  to  another  50,000  citizens,  then  we 
must  hear  the  complaint  of  over-production. 
But  the  passing  of  earnings  out  of  the  hands  of 
one  set  into  the  hands  of  another  set  is  a  single 
operation.     That  is  why  plenty  and  scarcity  go 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  3 1 

together  and  have  the  same  cause.  The  mon- 
opolists cause  such  a  division  of  earnings  as  to 
give  themselves  too  much,  while  they  leave  the 
balance  of  societ}-  too  little.  That  is  why  we 
have  over-production  always  side  by  side  with 
destitution. 

I  have  stated  that  this  piling  up  of  products 
was  a  useless  piling  up  of  products.  This  we 
shall  presently  see. 

Third.  The  monopolists  force,  check  and 
stoppage  of  production,  with  its  hardships,  until 
their  gains  or  over-productions  can  be  disposed 
of.  It  has  been  shown  that  the  gains  of  the 
monopolists  simply  pile  up. — accumulate  upon 
the  shelves  and  in  the  bins  of  warehouses  and 
in  storage  3'ards.  In  time  every  storing  place 
is  filled  to  overflowing.  Then  what  is  done.^ 
There  is  stop  put  to  production.  Manufactur- 
ing, mining  and  productive  concerns  which  have 
these  surpluses  are  closed  until  these  surpluses 
can  be  disposed  of.  Men  are  stopped  from  work, 
and  those  that  are  poor  are  thrown  upon  the 
charities  of  the  public  or  driven  into  crime  to 
get  the  wherewithal  to  sustain  life. 

Here,  I  ask,  where  was  the  wisdom  in  piling  up 
this  stuf!'if  production  must  cease  for  the  sake  of 
getting  it  consumed.'*  Has  an}-  good  purpose, 
whatever,  been  subserved.'*  All  society,  outside  of 
the  monopolists,  have  been  forced   to  practice  a 


32  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

system  of  self-denial,  more  or  less  stringent,  that 
an  over-production  might  be  saved.  Now  they 
must  be  forced  to  undergo  a  period  of  industrial 
depression,  with  its  dangers  and  hardships,  that 
this  over-production  maybe  consumed.  Would 
it  not  have  been  better  had  we  indulged  in  plen- 
teous consumption  of  our  productions  along  as 
we  created  them,  and  thus  avoided  the  occa- 
sion for  stoppage,  industrial  depression  and 
hard  times?  We  have,  in  effect,  been  forced  to 
work  five  years  and  to  be  idle  one  3'ear,  with 
the  result  of  a  poor  living  six  years.  Would  it 
not  have  been  better  for  us  to  have  kept  a  brisk 
activity  for  the  whole  six  3'ears  and  enjoyed  all 
we  could  produce  in  that  time  ?  We  work  that 
we  may  have  a  living,  and  as  good  a  one  as  we 
can  get.  Then,  why  should  we  work  five  3'ears, 
and  be  idle  one,  and  lose  the  comforts  that  the 
3xar  of  idleness  fails  to  bring  forth. ^ 

If  the  monopolist  is  looking  for  riches  alone, 
would  he  not  get  more  of  it  by  six  continuous 
3'ears  upon  a  smaller  margin  than  b3''  the  present 
course  with  excessive  margins.^  I  am  convinced 
that  any  one  who  will  take  time  to  examine  the 
subject  must  answer  in  the  affirmative.  I  ma3' 
proceed  to  another  fact. 

Fourth.  The  authors  of  monopolies  waste  our 
earnings  in  useless  over-investments.  The  great 
gains  which  the  monopolists  make   are   not  all 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  33 

put  into  the  forms  of  over-production.  Another 
name  for  their  great  gains  is  profits — extra  prof- 
its. A  portion  of  this  extra  profit  is  used  b}'  the 
monopohsts  to  increase  the  size  and  capacity  of 
their  industries.  But  the  increase  which  they 
make  is  a  misappHcation  of  capital.  Wh}-?  By 
producing  more  another  year,  without  changing 
their  terms  of  deahng  with  the  pubHc,  as  they 
do  not,  they  only  add  to  the  amount  which  goes 
into  over-production.  Why,  then,  do  the  mon- 
opolists increase  the  capacity  of  their  industries? 
Because  capital  is  always  craz}^  for  investment. 
These  monopolists  want  their  enormous  profits 
to  be  doing  something,  and  to  enlarge  industries 
already  over-large,  is  the  only  chance  they  see 
to  make  an  investment  that  promises  anything 
in  the  shape  of  reward. 

But  to  enlarge  industries  that  are  alread}' 
overlarge — is  not  that  a  waste  of  earnings.''  That 
money  which  has  gone  to  double  the  needed 
capacity  of  our  factories,  mines  and  railroads — 
would  not  a  more  wise  investment  of  a  share  of 
this  capital  have  been  in  farmers'  barns,  labor- 
ers' houses  and  homes,  struiJirlinfr  merchants'  ex- 
penscs,  poor  peoples'  clothes — in  fact,  where  it 
could  have  been  fully  used  instead  of  half  used? 
Should  the  lumber  manufacturers  profit  to  such 
an  extent  as  to  force  the  people  to  do  with  in- 
sufficient buildings,  while  they  double  the  coun. 


34  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

try's  needs  for  saw. and  planing  mills?  Should 
three-fourths  of  the  people  of  the  Union  be  forced 
to  curtail  in  their  wearing  apparel  in  order  that 
a  few  manufacturers  can  boast  of  a  manufac- 
turing capacity  sufficient  to  supply  the  world? 
Do  we  earn  that  we  may  enjoy  as  we  need  to 
enjoy,  or  do  we  earn  that  some  men  may  make 
a  grand  and  vain  display? 

I  think  the  burden  of  complaints  heard  around 
us  should  convince  us  that,  though  there  is  a 
one-sided  getting  of  wealth  and  development  of 
industries,  yet  nobody  is  satisfied  with  it — neither 
the  gainers  nor  the  losers.  The  cotton  and 
woollen  manufacturers'  wail  is,  "  What  shall  we 
do  to  find  a  market  for  our  surplus  cloths  and 
calicoes?"  The  workmen's  wail  is,  "What 
shall  wc  do  to  keep  ourselves,  wives  and  chil- 
dren from  nakedness?  "  The  lumberman  com- 
plains, "  What  shall  I  do  to  get  rid  of  ni}-  enor- 
mous stacks  of  lumber? "  The  farmer  com- 
plains, "  What  shall  I  do  for  the  means  to  pro- 
tect my  stock  from  the  storms  of  winter?  "  The 
stockholders  of  the  railroads  say,  "  How  are  we 
going  to  make  our  enormous  capital  in  railroad 
extensions  pay?  "  The  masses  say,  "  What  are 
we  to  do  for  capital  to  run  our  industries  with?" 
The  monopolists,  in  concert,  say,  "  What  are 
we  going  to  do  with  our  enormous  profits  and 
idle  money?"     The  balance  of  society,   in   con- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  35 

cert,  say,  "  How  are  we  to  raise  the  means  to 
make  our  affairs  come  out  so  that  both  ends 
will  meet?"  The  monopolists  have  overloaded 
themselves  with  facilities  for  doing  and  stuffs  to 
sell,  and  have  done  it  by  impoverishing  those 
whom  they  looked  to  do  for  and  sell  to.  They 
have  overleaped  bounds  and  ruined  their  market 
in  the  process  of  getting  ready  for  it.  In  con- 
sequence, they  have  got  themselves  into  a  situa- 
tion that  has  set  them  to  complaining  as  loudly 
as  the  rest  of  the  public.  It  worries  them  as 
much  not  to  be  able  to  sell  to  and  perform  for 
the  public  as  it  does  the  public  not  to  be  able  to 
patronize  them. 

We  now  see  what  is  the  secret  of  our  troubles. 
Since  the  one  side  complains  of  having  too  much 
and  the  other  side  of  having  too  little,  the  great 
trouble  is  because  of  unfair  distribution  of  earn- 
ings. The  monopolists  want  to  rapidly  enrich 
themselves,  but  they  are  proceeding  too  greedily 
and  it  is  giving  them  constant  dissatisfaction. 
They  want  to  trade  largely  with  the  people,  but 
they  dictate  such  one-sided  terms  as  to  exhaust 
the  peoples'  means  before  much  trading  has  been 
done.  They  want  to  force  the  people  to  Hve 
upon  little,  but  to  buy  much  at  the  same  time, 
and  because  it  cannot  be  done  they  only  get 
themselves  into  trouble.  They  cannot  sell  much 
to  the  people  if  they  charge  such  high  prices  as 


;^6  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION 

to  enable  the  people  to  buy  but  little.  The  doc- 
trine of  long  hours  and  starvation  wages  will 
never  produce  anything  but  a  thorn  to  its  best 
friends. 

If  the  monopolists  continue  on  in  their  policy 
of  over-investing  what  must  eventually  be  the 
shape  of  their  industries  and  that  of  the  condition 
ot  the  people.^  First,  their  own  industries  will  be 
five  times  as  large  as  the  people  need,  while  the 
people  will  be  so  poor  as  to  be  able  to  wear  noth- 
ing but  bear  coverings,  and  to  eat  nothing  but 
the  cheapest  sort  of  adulterations.  Secondl}',  the 
monopolists  Ihemselves  will  be  forced  to  a  cheap 
livdng,  since  it  will  take  all  they  can  get  out  of 
their  large  railroads  and  factories  and  all  the}' 
can  get  out  of  the  people  also  to  keep  their  over- 
sized railroads  and  factories  in  form  and  repair. 
Their  big  industries  will  be  like  elephants  on 
their  hands,  taking  all  the  animals  can  earn 
and  all  they  can  steal  besides  to  keep  them  alive. 
When  that  time  comes  many  railroad  lines  will 
be  abandoned  to  the  rust  and  many  factories 
will  be  given  up  to  the  rats  and  hooting  owls. 

Fifth.  The  authors  of  monopoly  cause  to  fall 
into  their  own  possessions  the  capital  of  the  bal- 
ance of  the  members  of  society.  It  has  been 
stated  that  the  monopolists  force  check  and  stop- 
page, when  surpluses  accrue,  until  they  can  rid 
themselves  of  their  over-productions.      We  may 


L'NFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  37 

now  ask,  whom  do  they  unload  their  over-pro- 
ductions upon?  The  answer  is,  upon  the  gene- 
ral public  of  course.  There  lacks  place  of  lodg- 
ment else  for  them ;  besides,the  public  must  subsist 
when  they  are  gaining  nothing  as  well  as  when 
they  are  gaining  something.  The  merchant 
must  eat,  clothe  and  shelter  himself  as  well  when 
his  sales  are  dull  and  he  is  falling  behind  as  when 
he  has  a  brisk  trade,  and  is  doing  well.  The 
laborer  must  eat  when  he  is  idle  as  well  as  when 
he  is  at  work. 

How  are  the  public  to  pay  for  these  over-pro- 
ductions, seeing  that  their  low  compensation  did 
not  permit  them  to  buy  the  stuffs  during  the  pro- 
cess of  their  creation  ?  Cut  off  from  the  power 
to  buy  them  at  one  time  how  are,  the  people  to 
buy  them  at  another  time.^ 

The  only  way  that  the  people  can  pay  for 
these  over-productions  is  by  having  recourse  up- 
on their  original  capital.  The  merchant  must 
subsist  upon  his  original  stock  of  goods  instead  of 
upon  the  profits  he  expects  to  make  from  sales. 
The  farmer  must  sell  off  some  of  his  land,  or 
mortgage  it,  to  pay  for  the  share  of  over-produc- 
tion he  buys  back.  The  laborer  must  part  with 
his  house  and  lot.  If  he  has  no  house  or  lot,  then 
the  public  must  be  taxed  to  support  him  in  the 
soup-house,  poor-house  or  pcnitentiar}'. 

To  conclude  upon  this  last  fact,  I  simply  state 

389252 


38 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


this  proposition,  which  is  obvious  enough  to  need 
no  explanation.  Extortion,  through  the  instru- 
mentahty  of  monopoly,  consists  in  gaining  away 
portions  of  our  earnings  along  as  we  create 
them,  then  of  forcing  us  to  take  back  these  earn- 
ings and  yielding  up  our  capital  in  exchange  for 
them.  The  policy,  of  course,  can  only  end  in 
reducing  our  children,  or  our  children's  -children 
at  furthest,  to  a  state  of  poverty  and  servitude. 


I 


CHAPTER  I. 


man's  mission  on  earth. 


Man  has  been  established  upon  earth  with  a 
design  looking  foremost  to  the  self-preservation, 
enjoyment  and  development  of  himself  while 
here.  This  we  judge  to  be  so  because  he  has 
implanted  within  him  an  irresoluble  want  or  in- 
clination to  achieve  and  realize  such  a  design, 
and  because  such  a  want  or  inclination  would  not 
have  been  implanted  within  him  had  it  not  been 
meant  to.  effect  such  an  achievement  and  realiza- 
tion. This  disposition  or  want,  repeating  itself 
under  a  ditlerent  phase  in  the  disposition  or  want 
to  do  what  will  conduce  to  the  preservation,  en- 
joyment and  development  of  self,  is  a  force  with- 
in man  which  he  cannot  annul  or  contrarize. 
Man  cannot  want,  or  want  to  educe,  harm  or 
misery  to  self  or  an  abridgment  in  the  number 
of  days  of  his  sojourn  upon  earth,  for  he  is  not  con- 
stituted so  to  want  and  as  he  is  constituted  so  he 
must  manifest   himself.     He  ma}'  and  does  seek 


40  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

that  which  to  himself  is  harmful,  but  he  does 
not  do  so  out  of  preference  or  under  the  thought 
that  he  is  doing  himself  injury;  he  does  so  only 
when  he  is  working  under  false  impressions  as  to 
results  or  under  morbid  conditions  of  self.  All 
the  rational  and  clear-sighted  acts  of  man  are 
favorable  to  the  end  judged  to  be  that  of  man's 
purpose  upon  earth,  and  guided  by  the  best 
judgment  he  can  command,  he  directs  his  energies 
toward  the  constant  accomplishment  of  this  pur- 
pose, not  persistently  merely,,  but  with  a  vigor  that 
marks  one  of  the  chief  characteristics  in  livinsf 
beings.  He  is  impelled  by  his  disposition  to  pre- 
serve and  prolong  his  life  with  all  the  energy  and 
diplomacy  he  can  command,  to  minister  to  his 
enjoyments  with  a  prolific  hand  and  to  develop 
himself  by  all  the  means  within  his  power. 

It  is  thus  he  is  led  lo  perform  the  duties  he  is 
to  perform  as  coming  within  the  pale  of  responsi- 
bilities he  is  made  to  assume  toward  fitting  him- 
self for  his  future  state. 

Whatever  aids  man  in  carr3'ing  out  his  design 
upon  earth,  is  right;  whatever  opposes  it,  is 
wrong.  This  we  conceive  to  be  so  because  it 
harmonizes  with  his  duties  as  involved  in  the 
belief,  based  upon  our  experiences,  that  nature 
has  not  set  up  parts  of  herself  in  such  a  fashion 
as  to  antagonize  other  parts    of   herself,  but  has 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  4 1 

made  all  thino^s  to  act  in  unison  one  with  the 
other. 

By  the  development  of  man  we  mean  his  im- 
provement in  the  art  of  ministering  to  his  self- 
preservation  and  enjoyment.  INIan  wants  to  live 
lonsr  and  well,  and  as  there  is  a  chance  for  im- 
provement  in  this  art  he  desires  to  avail  himself 
of  it,  the  longest  life  filled  with  the  greatest 
measure  of  enjoyment  conducing  most  to  the 
complete  satisfaction  of  himself. 

As  a  rule  what  is  applied  practicall}'  for  the 
sustenance  and  preservation  of  the  body,  afl:brds 
enjoyment  as  well,  and  what  is  applied  to  aftbrd 
in  the  main  enjo3'nient,  contributes  through  that 
enjoyment  to  the  self-preservation  of  man.  Food, 
man  eats  with  a  principal  view  of  affording  life, 
and  health  and  strength  of  bod}',  but  he  does  not 
consume  food  in  blank  unfeelingness.  There  is 
a  pleasure  in  eating  food.  Exercise  and  rest  must 
be  had  to  maintain  the  soundness  of  the  S3'stem, 
but  aside  from  this  use  of  them  there  is  a  real 
pleasure  in  exercise  and  rest.  To  enter  the 
category  of  things  considered  as  of  pleasure 
wholly,  as  music  and  sight  seeing.  They  answer 
a  purpose  more  than  that  of  mere  pleasure.  The}' 
accelerate  the  bodily  functions,  invigorate  the 
system  and  thus  conduce  to  prolong  life.  As  what 
satisfies  the  one  want  of  man  does  so  no  less 
effectually    on    account    of    its    contributing    to 


42  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

satisfy  the  other  want,  man  can  claim  to  be  fortu- 
nate in  having  things  minister  doubly  to  the 
satisfaction  of  himself. 

The  purpose  of  man's  creation;  the  long  living 
comfort,  happiness  and  advancement  of  man;  the 
welfare  of  man;  the  right  doing  of  man;  his  duty 
to  himself;  his  wants,  in  an  enlightened  manner 
understood;  his  inclination  in  behalf  of  himself; 
the  real  interest  of  himself;  his  proper  self-interest, 
are  all  homogeneous  terms,  phrases  expressive  of 
a  train  of  ideas  in  unison  with  a  central  concept- 
ion which  is  this:  a  justification  of  whatever  is 
calculated,  really  and  unequivocally  and  without 
misapprehension,  to  lengthen  out  the  days  of  man 
and  to  swell  the  measure  and  intensity  of  his 
joys.  These  and  all  expressions  of  a  kindred 
strain  are  delivered  in  the  interest  ot  the  object 
indexed  by  his  sympathies  and  will  as  being  the 
object  of  his  earthly  career.  It  is  in  the  sense 
that  the  welfare  of  man  consists  in  the  sustain- 
ment  and  happiness  of  him  that  these  phrases  are 
universally  used  and  understood  by  man,  because 
his  nature,  reason  and  experience  forbid  him  to 
conceive  that  he  has  been  placed  here  for  any 
other  purpose.  Following  such  a  conception  as 
this  must  be  the  one  that  of  all  the  devices  em- 
ployed by  man  for  the  attainment  of,  and  experi- 
ence in,  these  purposes  of  his  existence,  none 
can   be  considered     irrational   or    blameworthy, 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  43 

none  can  be  justifiably  characterized  as  extrava- 
gant, let  them  elicit  results  never  so  profuse,  so 
they  are  of  a  kind  fitted  to  really  promote  these 
purposes,  for  these  are  the  purposes  of  his  exist- 
ance,  the  ends  he  v^'as  created  to  accomplish  as 
coming  within  the  pale  of  responsibiHties  he  w^as 
made  to  assume  in  order  to  the  accomplishing 
of  still  more  ultimate  ends  of  himself,  and  the 
more  fully  he  accomplishes  these  ends  the  more 
full}-  does  he  fulfill  the  purpose  of  his  creation — 
that  is,  act  out  his  part  here,  and  his  duties 
to  himself. 

AGENCIES    OR   MEANS. 

Man  does  not  execute  his  mission  without  the 
application  and  impropriation  of  agencies  or 
means.  Thus  when  we  sa}''  that  man  preserves 
his  life  and  health  we  signify  among  other  things 
that  he  employs  food,  drink  and  raiment  in  the 
operation;  that  he  exercises  himself,  rests  and 
sleeps.  Without  agencies  or  means,  or,  as  other- 
wise called,  wants  adapted  to  the  promotion  of 
man's  mission  upon  earth,  there  could  not  be 
man's  mission,  because  no  man,  he  not  being  sub- 
sistive  independent  of  his  resources.  Man 
depends  upon  food  and  drink,  upon  raiment  and 
shelter,  upon  air  and  sunshine,  upon  things  vital 
and  things  not  vital,  upon  things  requiring  task 
and  those   requiring   no    task  to  make  him  what 


44  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

he  Is  and  what  he  is  to  be.  It  is  these  that  are 
appHed  by  himself  to  his  person  and  are  inbibed 
by  his  person  with  the  view  to  extend  his  hold 
upon  his  life,  to  give  to  himself  comfort  and  en- 
joyment and  to  grant  to  himself  the  development 
or  advancement  of  himself.  When  supplied 
with  an  adequacy  of  these,  his  agencies,  means 
or  wants,  the  purpose  of  his  creation  is  promoted 
to  the  highest  degree. 

Some  things  come  to  man  thoroughly  fitted  in 
the  natural  state  to  serve  him,  as  the  sunshine 
and  air  of  free  space.  These  are  essential  to  his 
welfare  but  compose  but  a  part  of  things  essen- 
tial to  him.  Much  that  is  needed  by  him  must 
go  through  the  ordeal  of  task  before  it  is  fitted  for 
his  use.  Such  are  bread,  clothes,  houses  and 
everything  we  see  which  has  been  fashioned  by 
man  out  of  the  materials  of  the  earth.  For  the 
fashioning  of  these  things  there  has  been  called 
into  practical  application  the  agency  of  exertion, 
essential  in  and  of  itself  to  give  health  and 
strength  and  pleasure  to  the  system.  After  ex- 
ertion comes  rest  and  leisure  and  sleep,  made 
sweet  by  virtue  of  exertion,  and  these  complete 
the  round  of  agencies  which  conduce  to  the  self- 
preservation  and   enjoyment  of  man. 

The  agencies  which  conduce  to  the  welfare  of 
man  we   may  now  classify,    in  order  to  a  more 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


45 


thorough  explanation  and  understanding  of  them. 
They  are: 

1.  Things  ready  in  the  natural  or  primitive 
state  to  be  appropriated  by  him,  as  the  air  of  free 
space,  the  light  and  warmth  of  the  sun,  the 
water  running  at  his  feet. 

2.  Things  made  ready  from  unready  material 
in  the  natural  state.  These  compose  all  the 
products  of  man's  industr}',  tlie  wxalth  of  his  toil 
acquired  by  him  for  the  support  of  himself. 

3.  Exertion  of  mind  and  body.  It  is  by  the 
exertion  of  man  that  tangible  acquisitions  for  the 
use  of  him  are  made  to  arise,  comprising  the 
second  class  of  agencies.  But  exertion  becomes 
a  third  agency  by  contributing  to  the  needs  of 
man  on  its  own  account  and  irrespective  of  the 
tangible  acquisitions  summoned  through  it,  Man 
must  undergo  exertion  to  give  to  himself  health 
and  strength  and  tone  of  S3'stem,  and  to  work  ofT 
the  regularly  recurring  uneasiness  which  arise 
within  the  system  and  which  have  for  their  anti- 
dote,exertion. 

4.  Things  partaking  of  a  restorative  character 
^s  rest,  leisure,  and  sleep.  Exertion,  as  an  agency 
of  itself  answers  its  purpose  in  exhausting  and 
tiring  parts  of  the  system  when  there  comes  into 
need  an  agency  of  a  reactionary  or  recuperative 
sort.  Opposed  to  the  day  of  activity,  there  is  the 
night  of    sleep;  opposed  to    toil,  rest;  opposed  to 


4^  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

application,  recreation;  opposed  to  the  active 
effort  for  supply,  the  passive  enjoyment  of 
supply. 

In  these  four  classes  are  included  all  of  the 
agencies  or  wants  of  man  considered  as  being 
pre-supplied  with  the  earth  for  an  abode.  The 
classification  is  based  upon  peculiarities  predom- 
inant in  each  set  and  will  aid  in  the  elucidation 
of  our  subject. 

These  different  classes,  we  observe,  occupy 
different  relationshipsto  man.  The  first  are  pure 
gratuities  of  nature.  They  come  to  him  with- 
out call  or  help,  and  with  all  are  so  perfect  for 
the  purposes  they  are  designed  to  answer  that  no 
improvement  in  them  could  be  supposed.  They 
are  as  essential  to  him  as  any  that  occupy  a 
place  upon  his  list  of  wants,  but  they  cause  him 
no  care  to  assure  their  coming  or  to  assure  their 
suitableness  for  him.  They  are  perfectly  satis- 
factor}'  to  man. 

To  the  others  are  attached  man's  great  solici- 
tude and  concern  as  being  wants  which  he,  fixed 
so  as  to  be  largel}^  the  responsible  architect  of  his 
own  fortune,  must  satisfactorily  work  out  for  him- 
self if  they  are  to  be  satisfactorily  worked  out  at 
all.  In  the  present  stage  of  his  existence  these 
wants  are  lacking.  They  are  not  thoroughly 
satisfactory  to  him.  They  are  pervaded  with 
imperfections.   But  while  this  is  true  it  is  also  true 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  47 

that  these  imperfections  are  not  unsusceptible  of 
mitio-ative  and  even  of  obliterative  influences  at 
the  hand  of  man.  In  this  fact  there  is  suppHed  a 
hope  and  a  solace  for  man  as  being  a  creature 
disposed  to  be  gratified  and  to  be  rid  of  all  imper- 
fections attending  his  means  of  gratification.  If 
we  discover  the  exact  condition  of  existence  and 
relationship  to  man,  of  the  wants  which  are  de- 
pendent upon  him  for  their  coming  and  condition 
we  will  be  possessed  of  a  clearer  conception  of 
what  are  the  things  which  go  to  make  up  the 
real  problem  man  is  to  solve  in  order  to  the  com. 
plete  welfare  of  himself,  and  why  it  is  his  tenden- 
cies are  bent  always  and  tenaciously  into  a  one 
single  direction  or  course  of  pursuing. 

The  first  of  these  three  self-regulative  wants 
of  man,  that  is  the  second  in  the  list,or  task  made 
means,  stand  related  to  man  in  this  way:  the 
task  for  their  supply  must  proceed  from  him. 
His  is  the  task  by  which  they  are  made  to 
appear. 

This  is  in  accordance  with  the  theory  of  crea- 
tion, universally  encountered,  that  whatever  is 
sustained  by  the  help  of  task  must  be  the  author 
of  the  task  which  helps  to  sustain  it.  The  bird 
which  would  have  food,  to  be  used  as  "a  means 
of  support  of  itself,  must  make  itself  a  means  for 
procuring  that  food.  Tiie  wild  beast  must  be 
itself  the  seeker  of  its  prey;  the  plant   must  be 


48  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION-. 

itself  the  accumulator  of  the  sap  which  enters  into 
its  growth.  Man  is  no  exception  to  the  conse. 
quences  of  this  rule.  Standing  in  need  of  task- 
made  means  to  fulfill  the  purpose  of  his  creation 
it  devolves  upon  him  to  expend  the  task  for  their 
procurement. 

The  task  which  man  undergoes  for  the  procure- 
ment of  his  task-supplied  means  is  another  want 
of  his,  coming  under  the  head  of  the  third  class 
of  wants,  and  stands  related  to  him  as  means,  not 
consisting  of  outward  things  to  be  applied  by 
himself  unto  himself,  but  as  means  arising  within 
and  that  are  to  be  imbibed  by  himself  through 
the  energy  of  himself.  That  provision  in  the  econ- 
omy of  nature  which  makes  the  existence  of  man's 
need  also  an  instrumentality  for  supplying  another 
need,  does  not  make  the  exertion  less  satisfactory 
on  that  account,  but  more  so.  Exertion  under 
gone  to  satisfy  the  muscular  need  of  contraction 
and  relaxation,  and  the  mind's  need  of  attention 
and  concentration,  is  enhanced  in  its  power  to 
satisfy  in  its  special  field  by  reason  of  its  leading 
to  satisfaction  in  another  field.  Anyone  who  will 
take  the  trouble  to  study  the  subject,  will  be 
convinced  that  the  productive  feature  of  exertion 
gives  to  it  pungency  and  zest,  and  constitutes  in 
other  respects  a  very  important  part  of  the  virtue 
in  exertion,  as  exertion,  to  satisfy. 

Exertion  of  this  sort  is   what  we  call  by   the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  49 

name  of  work,  toil,  labor.  It  occupies  a  double 
relationship  to  man.  It  satisfies  a  craving  that 
can  only  be  satisfied  by  things  existing  within, 
and  it  is  a  means  of  granting  to  him  things 
needed  to  satisfy  cravings  of  his  which  can  only 
be  satisfied  by  the  application  of  things  existing 
from  without. 

The  last  class  of  agencies  are  like  the  class 
just  above  in  this:  the}^  are  agencies  to  be  had  as 
they  are  undergone  or  to  be  enjoyed  simultane- 
ously as  they  are  developed  through  certain 
manipulations  of  the  body,  but  they  are  unlike 
this  same  class  above  in  this,  they  are  not  a  means 
of  suppl3-ing  for  other,  wants.  They  have  no 
results  beyond  satisfying  the  single  desires  they 
are  designed  to  satisfy.  Rest  and  sleep  produce 
man  nothing  from  without,  but  he  must  have 
them  just  as  much  as  if  they  did.  He  wants  also 
leisure  and  recreation,  and  the  exertion  that  is 
for  pastime  instead  of  profit,  and  that  calls  into 
play  a  new  set  of  activities  to  exert  an  influence 
in  restorinsf  to  freshness  and  vi^^or  the  lons^  used 
and  tired  activities.  This  class  of  wants  would 
come  under  the  head  of  idleness,  and  we  can  say 
man  wants  idleness  as  well  as  work. 

LACKS    AND    TENDENCIES. 

These  three  classes  of  wants,  just  gone  over, 
are  imperfect,  unsatisfactory  to  man,   not   calcu- 


50  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

lated  to  conduce   thoroughly  to  his  welfare.     In 
what  respect  are  thus  lacking  or  deficient: 

1.  There  is  too  little  of  the  fruits  of  toil. 

2.  There  is  required  an  excess  of  toil. 

3.  There  is  too  little  of  the  period  of  idleness  or 
relief  from  toil. 

These  lacks  are  evils  to  mankind.  They  are 
drawbacks  to  the  promotion  of  the  purpose  of 
his  existence.  What  is  the  way  to  mitigation  or 
avoidance  of  these  evils? 

The  way  is  through  increased  efficacy  of 
effort;  through  making  labor  more  productive 
by  degrees.  That  gives  us  more  fruits  for  the 
same  toil,  or  makes  requisite  less  toil  for  the 
same  fruits,  or  works  betterments  as  it  is  apt  to 
be  made  to  do  both  ways,  and  when  there  is  less 
toil  required  it  is  an  improvement  in  the  last  de- 
partment of  wants. 

Now  inasmuch  as  increased  productiveness  or 
labor  enhances  the  welfare  of  man,  and  his  wel- 
fare is  the  cardinal  desire  of  his  being,  with  what 
view  uppermost  are  we  always  to  find  man  pur- 
suing.'^ 

With  the  view  uppermost  always  to  accomplish 
the  most  possible  with  a  given  amount  of  effort, 
or,  as  equivalently  stated,  to  accomplish  any  given 
thing  with  the  least  possible  amount  of  efibrt.  This 
is  his  cardinal  tendency:  to  adopt  that  line  and 
nolicy  of  conduct    which    will   conspire   most  to 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION, 


5^ 


satisfy  his  wants  for  material  things  or  means  on 
the  one  side  without  detracting  incongruously 
from  his  wants  for  rest,  recreation  and  saving  of 
health  and  strength  on  the  other  side.  He  does 
not  court  absolute  idleness.  We  do  nQt  try  to  con- 
vey any  such  meaning.  It  is  an  opinion  common- 
ly held,  however,  that  he  does  wish  that — that  he 
would  like  wholly  to  be  in  possession  of  a  plenty 
of  the  fruits  of  effort,  and  to  be  excused  wholly 
from  undergoing  effort,  in  the  procurement  of 
them.  But  this  is  an  erronous  opinion,  and  arises 
from  confounding  exertion  with  over-exertion. 
The  fact  is,  man  wants  exertion  no  less  than  he 
wants  the  fruits  of  exertion.  Exertion  is  as  essen- 
tial to  the  welfare  of  man,  exertion  at  labor,  as 
any  other  thing  that  is  listed  among  his  means 
of  welfare.  But  man  desires  his  exertion  to  be, 
as  he  desires  all  his  other  asfencies  to  be,  in 
quantity  and  in  kind  suited  to  conduce  to  his  wel- 
fare. He  wants  so  much  for  instance,  as  condu- 
ces to  the  invigoration  and  strengthening  of  the 
system,  but  not  so  much  as  tires  inordinatel}-  and 
annoys  and  cripples  and  so  produces  an  opposed 
effect.  Idleness  is  irksome  to  man,  as  irksome 
as  overwork.  In  moderate  toil  is  man's  needs 
and  pleasureable  feelings,  that  are  dependent 
upon  mental  and  bodily  activity,  answered.  When 
man  has  reached  that  station  of  advance  in 
which  all  his  varying  wants  for  toil-made  wealth 


52  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

can  be  supplied  through  the  moderate  exercise 
of  his  mind  and  bod}^,  then  will  he  have  reached 
the  goal  of  his  ambition  to  self-satisi3^  He  will 
then  revel  in  the  possession  of  a  full  measure  in 
all  his  wants.  Linked  with  the  gratuitous  wants  of 
nature,  which  are  always  aright,  there  will  be  so 
much  of  material  products  as  he  shall  have  a 
desire  to  apply,  procurable  through  so  much  of 
effort  as  he  shall  have  a  real  desire  to  undergo, 
and  as  leavesunintrenchedupon  so  much  of  time 
as  is  wanted  to  be  undergone  in  relief  from  toil. 
All  these  he  will  have,  toil  among  the  rest,  but 
the  toil  so  potentized  that  what  is  wanted  of  it 
will  bring  and  leave  what  is  wanted  of  the  others 
reared  or  left  to  grow  out  of  it. 

Now  a  little  further  upon  this  same  topic  that 
we  may  not  be  misled  by  expressions  employed. 
It  is  thoroughly  proper  to  say  that  man  wants  to 
do  all  that  is  in  his  power  to  forward  the  purpose 
of  his  existence,  because  when  we  say  this  we 
do  not  mean,  as  is  often  thought,  that  he  wants 
to  undergo  all  the  exertion  his  system  can  bear 
to  procure  effort-induced  things,  productions  of 
labor,  for  himself.  We  mean  that  he  wants  to  do 
all  in  his  power  to  make  so  much  exertion  as  he 
desires  to  undergo,  bring  him  so  much  of  effort- 
induced  things  as  he  desires  to  have,  whence  all 
will  be  right  for  him.     These  meanings  must  be 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  53 

kept  clearly  cut  in  the  mind  to  obviate  confusion. 
Let  us  go  over  the  ground  of  man's  wants  for 
sake  of  a  clear  understanding. 

Tklan  wants  the  self-preservation,  enjoyment 
and  development  of  himself.  As  he  cannot  have 
these  without  agencies  or  means(and  called  wants) 
adapted  to  the  accomplishment  of  them,  he  de- 
sires to  possess  the  agencies  or  means  required  for 
their  accomplishment.  As  he  cannot  possess  these 
agencies  or  means,  or  a  large  part  of  them  at 
least,  through  non-attempt,  he  desires  to  do  that 
which  will  put  him  in  possession  of  them.  That 
is  he  -desires  to  do  that  which  will  give  him  as 
much  exercise  in  toil  as  he  needs,  as  much  leis- 
ure or  relief  fromtoilas  he  needs,and  as  much  tcii 
made  things  as  he  needs  to  accompany  as  much 
of  the  gratuities  of  nature  as  he  needs,  but  here- 
in we  have  a  case  of  the  use  of  the  verb  "to  do," 
in  which  it  is  not  by  great  odds  to  be  construed 
as  signifying  nothing  but  laborious  effort;  it  is 
to  be  interpreted  as  signifying  to  a  large  extent 
exactly  to  the  contrary — the  avoidance  of  labor- 
ious eftbrt.  And  it  is  in  this  sense  that  we  are 
to  understand  man's  efforts  to  satisf}'  himself. 

Now  if  we  have  arrived  at  a  clear  conception 
of  what  are  man's  real  wants,  and  how  are  to  be 
•  construed    his    desires    to   do,    and  I  trust  that  I 
have  conveyed  the    idea,    if  not  in  the  best  fash- 
ion, at  any  rate  conveyed  it,  we  are  ready  to  go 


54  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

back  to  man's  great  tendency,  described  again  as 
the  propensity  to  render  most  efficacious  at  all 
times  the  labor  bestowed  in  given  cases,  or 
which  is  the  same  in  meaning,  to  render  least 
extensive  the  effort  required  in  special  cases 
This  tendency  is  identical  with  the  desire  of 
man  for  self-promotion,  and  to  have  what  will 
promote  him,  and  to  do  what  will  promote  him, 
as  just  explained,  it  being  merely  a  manifestation 
of  the  desire  under  that  phase  which  consists  in 
the  selection  and  adoption  of  a  particular  method 
of  promoting  his  welfare.  There  are  other 
phases  of  the  desire  to  be  noticed  as  we  proceed. 
This  desire  is  known  under  its  various  phases  and 
shades  of  meaning  as  the  principle  of  self-preser- 
vation, self-protection  and  so  on,  more  commonly 
as  self-interest,  and  it  is  a  ruling  force  in  man, 
over-mastering  all  his  other  forces.  Manifesting 
itself  under  that  particular  phase  of  itself  repre- 
sented by  the  tendency  just  under  discussion,  it  is 
a  force  which  actuates  man  into  stern  adhesion  to 
a  one  steady  pohcy  of  operating,  viz:  the  poHcy  of 
oroinsf  where  he  can  o^et  the  most  with  criven  ex- 
penditure,  and  it  does  this  all  the  while  there  is  an 
active  body  enveloping  the  force.  As  such  a 
force  it  has  so  much  to  do  with   the  destiny  of 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  55 

man,  is  a  cause  leading  to  such  momentous  con- 
sequences, that  I  desire  to  call  the  reader's  spec- 
ial attention  to  its  existence  and  nature.  For  it 
is  the  force  which  propels  man  into  the  accom- 
plishment of  his  welfare  or  ill-fare  according  as 
the  conditions  under  which  he  operates  are  right 
or  wrong. 

We  now  see  that  man  desires  to  potentize  his 
labor  because  his  deficiencies  as  to  his  satisfac- 
tionsarise  from  impotenc}'  of  his  labor.  If  his 
deficiencies  arose  from  some  other  cause  he 
would  desire  to  eradicate  the  other  cause,  what- 
ever it  was,  and  his  tendency  would  be  in  some 
other  direction  suited  to  the  eradication  of  this 
cause.  As  it  is  now,  superior  potency  ot  labor 
is  what  is  needed.  Man,  or  mankind,  has  never 
experienced  the  time  when  he  could  procure 
more  of  the  fruits  of  toil  than  he  desired  to  pos- 
sess with  less  exertion  than  he  desired  to  under- 
go. Or,  as  stated  after  the  manner  in  which  we 
must  interpret  his  rational  desires,  he  has  never 
experienced  the  time  when  he  could  procure 
more  than  was  good  for  him  with  less  eflbrt  than 
was  good  for  him.  It  has  always  been  entirely 
the  reverse  with  him.  But  he  has  within  him- 
self the  power  to  increase  his  productiveness,  and 
each  step  in  this  sort  of  advance  is  a  step  toward 
the  betterment  of  his  condition.  He  earns  more 
comforts,  or  needs  not   to  work   so   hard  to  get 


56  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

necessary  comforts,  or  he  shares  betterments  both 
ways  and  in  all  ways.  He  desires  betterments, 
so  we  see  why  he  works  for  betterments.  This 
he  will  continue  to  do  until  he  has  brought  him- 
self up  to  a  state  of  perfection  in  regard  to  his 
wants,  if  that  be  possible,  when  it  can  be  expec- 
ted that  he  will  stand  on  the  alert  to  maintain 
that  degree  of  potency  in  his  efforts  which 
conduces  to  entire  satisfaction,  for  alertness  will 
be  required  as  much  to  maintain  the  proper  de. 
gree,  and  to  prevent  retrograde,  as  it  was  re- 
quired in  the  first  place  to  attain  to  it,  and  man 
will  always  be  on  the  alert  to  grant  entire  satis- 
faction to  himself.  Nor  is  the  alertness,  as  a 
thing  of  itself  wanted  to  be  avoided,  for  there  is 
a  pungent  pleasure  in  watching  for  one's  best 
good. 


CHAPTER  11. 

METHODS  OF  WEALTH  GETTING. 

We  have  seen  that  man  tends  to  provide  for 
himself  as  best  he  possibly  can,  and  that  this  is 
done  b}^  maximumizing  his  productiveness,  or, 
as  some  may  better  understand  it,  by  operating 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  occasion  to  himself  the 
greatest  profit.  INIan  resorts  to  various  devices 
in  order  to  achieve  the  greatest  results.  These 
devices  we  may  divide  into  two  classes  :  the 
justifiable  and  the  unjustifiable.  The  justifiable 
devices  are  those  which  really  conduce  to  the 
welfare  of  man,  and  consist  in  attempts  to  over- 
come the  forces  of  nature.  The  unjustifiable 
devices  are  those  which  do  not  conduce  to  the 
welfare  of  man,  but  to  the  contrary,  and  they 
consist  in  attempts  to  profit  one  fellow  at  the  ex- 
pense of  another  fellow. 

There  are  but  two  ways  in  which  an  indivi- 
dual can  come  into  the  possession  of  wealth,  as 
the  fruits  of  toil  are  commonl}-  called. 


5^  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

1.  By  producing  it  out  of  natural  resources. 

2.  By  exacting  it  off  one's  fellow  after  the 
latter  has  produced  it. 

Profiting  by  producing  out  of  the  natural  re- 
sources is  earning  wealth,  and  such  wealth  is 
appropriately  called  earnings.  Profiting  by  ex- 
acting from  one's  fellow  is  not  earning  wealth, 
and  the  wealth  so  procured  must  be  character- 
ized by  some  other  term  than  that  of  earnings. 

EARNINGS. 

By  reference  to  the  classified  list  of  agencies 
on  a  previous  page,  we  observe  that  some  con- 
sist of  things  to  be  impropriated  by  man  from 
without,  as  the  sun,  air,  food, clothes;  that  others 
are  things  which  he  gets  from  within,  through 
certain  manifestations  of  the  bod}',  as  exertion, 
rest.  Of  the  means  which  have  their  sources 
outward  we  notice  that  some  of  them,  like  the 
sun  and  air,  come  to  him  ready  in  their  primi- 
tive state  for  his  use,  but  that  others  are  such  as 
have  gone  through  the  ordeal  of  task  in  order  to 
a  rendering  of  them  available  by  him,  the  task 
proceeding  from  him.  Now,  what  do  the 
task-made  things  consist  of  ?  The}'  consist 
of  modified  natural  elements.  They  are  things 
which  once  existed  in  a  raw  state,  but  which 
have  undergone  a  change  in  form  and  place  cal- 
culated to  answer  man's  needs.     If  they  had  not 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTIOX.  59 

previously  existed  in  a  raw  state  they  could  not 
subsequently  have  existed  in  any  form  because 
man  cannot  produce  something  from  nothing,  he 
can  onU'  modify.  Task-made  things  then  are 
but  prepared  or  modified  things.  They  may  be 
things  that  have  passed  through  a  series  of  mod- 
ifications before  being  made  ready  for  man's  im- 
mediate use,  or  they  may  be  things  not  ready 
but  under  way  of  completion,  but  in  such 
case,  find  them  in  what  stage  we  may, 
they  are  alwa37's  traceable  backward  to  the 
raw  materials  resting  in  or  upon  the  earth,  for 
from  thence  must  all  thinsfs  for  the  use  of  man 
first  arise,  or  else  arise  not  at  all.  Holding  the 
terms  to  that  construction  which  implies  real 
production  of  wealthy  then,  there  is  onl}^  one 
kind  of  definition  for  the  word  earning, — It  is 
profiting  by  overcoming  the  forces  of  nature. 
Or,  it  is  the  task  of  preparing  things  out  of  other 
things,  based  upon  a  beginning  with  the  primitive 
elements,  for  the  use  of  man.  Or,  it  is  chang- 
ing things  from  the  forms  and  situations  unavail- 
able to  man  into  forms  and  situations  available 
to  him.  Or,  it  is  the  attack  of  man  upon  nature 
to  force  portions  of  herself  to  assume  conditions, 
formations  and  locations  best  adapted  to  be  laid 
hold  upon  and  utilized  by  man.  Under  such  a 
construction  it  becomes  true  that  every  venture 
of   man   wliich   results   in    renderin"-    something 


bo  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

readier  to  be  applied  by  man  for  the  immediate 
satisfaction  of  himself  than  it  was  before,  is  an 
act  of  earning.  Also,  that  every  act  of  earning 
adds  to  the  sum  of  things  or  eases  with  which  a 
man  satisfies  himself.  Also,  that  any  act  which 
makes  no  addition  to  wealth  in  any  wa}^,  but  con- 
sists of  a  mere  giving  out  of  one  hand  into  an- 
other is  not  an  act  of  earning. 

By  this  last  method  of  procuring  wealth,  viz: 
exacting  oft'  one's  fellows,  we  cannot  say  there 
is  literally  no  addition  anywhere.  There  is  ad- 
dition, but  it  is  addition  to  one  man's  portion, 
made  by  subtraction  from  another  man's  propor- 
tion. But  this  gives  nothing  to  man  in  the  com- 
pact, or  society  as  a  whole. 

Between  these  two  sources  from  which  man 
obtains  wealth,  he  has  no  choice.  He  must  earn 
it  in  a  contest  with  nature,  or  he  must  exact  it 
from  his  fellow  man,  the  immaterial  quantities  in 
free  gifts  excepted. 

The  justifiableness  and  unjustifiableness  of 
wealth-getting  in  each  of  these  two  methods  will 
be  made  to  appear  in  the  discussions  to  follow. 
At  this  instant  we  will  suppose  that  all  persons 
turn  to  exacting  oft'  one  another,  and  none  en- 
gage more  in  producing  new  wealth  from 
nature.  What  would  follow?  As  the  consump- 
tion of  wealth  for  immediate  personal  satisfaction 
could  not  cease,  it  would   only  be  a  question  of 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  6 1 

time  when  all  should  reach  the  point  of  indigence, 
then  perish  for  want  of  subsistence.  It  is  plain 
from  this  that  there  is  no  merit,  but  actual  des- 
truction, in  the  entire  subsistence  of  the  people 
off  one  another. 

We  can  look  into  the  conditions  which  con- 
spire to  promote  a  people's  welfare  and  if  we 
find  that  under  no  conditions  can  they  produce 
more  from  nature  than  they  can  utilize  for  the 
benefit  of  themselves,  then  any  other  method  of 
o-etting  wealth  by  any  individual  than  that  of 
producing  it  from  nature,  than  that  of  rendering 
something  less  near  to  the  form  and  place  of  its 
primitiveness  or  birth,  and  more  near  to  the  form 
and  place  adapted  to  the  use  of  man,  is  thoroughly 
unjustifiable.  For  if  no  other  harm  resulted  there 
would  be  this  much  harm,  society  has  lost  of  the 
chance  to  realize  a  benefit  that  might  have  been 
hers,  had  the  individual's  eftbrt  been  properly 
expended. 

-  This  harm  to  societ}^  is  not  to  be  measured 
wholly,  however,  by  what  might  have  been  her 
gain  from  the  proper  direction  of  the  effort  of  the 
individual.  It  is  to  be  measured  by  the  addition 
to  the  loss  from  inexperienced  benefits,  of  all  the 
evil  consequences  growing  out  of  the  exactions 
of  individuals  oft'  other  individuals.  The  notice 
of  these  consequences  we  shall  defer  until  after  a 
notice  of  some  pre-requisite  topics. 


62  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


NO      CONTRADICTION. 

We  have  adopted  the  theory  that  man's  mis- 
sion upon  earth,  the  part  he  is  to  perform  toward 
advancing  himself  toward  some  more  ultimate 
end  had  in  view  by  his  Creator,  is  to  be  judged 
by  his  inclinations,  by  what  he  is  disposed  to 
have  and  to  do  for  himself.  This  theory  would 
have  no  support  if  we  did  not  look  beyond  man's 
real  acts  and  resorts.  Man  resorts  to  measures 
both  justifiable  and  unjustifiable;  that  is,  he  em- 
ploys measures  that  work  harm  to  him  as  well 
as  measures  that  work  good  to  him.  Here 
is  apparently  contradiction.  But  this  appearance 
of  contradiction  is  dispelled  just  as  soon  as  we 
look  a  little  further  and  discover  that  the  intefii 
of  man,  whatever  the  devices  he  emplo3's,  is  to 
work  good  to  himself,  and  that  he  does  not  work 
against  what  we  claim  to  be  his  mission  out  of 
preference,  but  does  so  under  the  delusion  that 
he  is  working  in  harmony  with  that  object.  He 
sees  what  appears  to  him  to  be  the  gaining  of  a 
benefit.  The  real  facts  and  consequences  in  the 
case  are  beyond  the  vision  of  his  reason.  There 
IS  no  rational  person  who  would  tell  you  that  one 
set  of  citizens  would  follow  the  trade  of  plucking 
another  set  of  citizens,  if  they  did  not  think  that 
they  obtained  genuine  benefit  thereby. 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  63 


WHY     DOES     MAN     MISTAKE     AND     ENCROACH? 

A  just  apprehension  of  the  nature  of  the  reme- 
dial measures  which  should  be  emplo3-ed  for  the 
abatement  of  an  evil,  can  only  succeed  a  just  com- 
prehension of  the  nature  of  the  causes  which  lead 
to  the  evil.  A  comparison  of  the  results  of 
proper  provisions  with  the  results  of  improper 
provisions,  for  the  economic  welfare  of  man,  will 
lead  to  a  clearer  understanding  of  all  that  per- 
tains to  the  results  and  the  economic  welfare. 
For  reasons  such  as  these  suggested,  I  prefer, 
before  going  further,  to  discover  the  cause  or 
occasion  of  man's  selection  and  acceptance  of  un- 
justifiable devices,  and  his  willingness  or  unwill- 
ingness to  forbear,  to  profit  at  the  expense  of  a 
being  whom  we  might  be  led  to  believe  he  would 
be  deterred  from  harming,  out  of  fellow-feeling 
and  regard  for  an  equal. 

The  cause  or  occasion  of  these  undesirable 
manifestations  in  man  are,  according  to  my 
views: 

1.  The  erroneousness  of  man. 

2.  The  preponderant  strength  of  his  self-in- 
terest. 


64  UNFAIR     DIST]^IBUTION. 


ERRONEOUSNESS    OF   MAN. 

Man's  mind  is  so  constituted  that  he  is  liable 
to  err  in  his  estimates,  both  as  to  what  are  the 
best  methods  of  gaining  advantages  and  as  to 
what  are  the  best  advantages  when  gained.  He 
may  start  out  for  the  purpose  of  alighting  upon 
a  coveted  landing,  and  fail  of  success  through 
lack  of  judgment  in  planing;  or  he  may  suc- 
ceed, but  be  resting  then  where  a  more  enlight- 
ened judgment  would  reveal  to  him  was  an  alto- 
gether undesirable  position.  .  He  is  a  being  that 
makes  mistakes. 

Man  may  think  that  the  gathering  of  the  bulk 
of  capital  into  the  hands  of  a  few  leaders,  with 
the  great  mass  converted  into  a  state  of  depend- 
ency, is  the  best  form  into  which  society  can  be 
organized,  considering  the  nature  and  tendencies 
of  men.  Hence  are  willing  that  one  class  should 
exact,  and  another  should  be  exacted  from. 

Or,  they  may  decline  to  concede  that  there  is 
innate  equality  of  rights  among  individuals,  the 
idea  of  such  individuals  being  that  a  class  of 
selects  are  entitled  to  the  superfluities  of  the 
earth,  the  balance  having  all  their  deserts  when 
they  have  been  left  a  sustenence.  Such  be- 
lievers call  it  justifiable,  which  we  call  unjustifi- 
able. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  65 

Or,  they  may  suppose  that  the  concentration 
of  capital  is  inevitable  and  unavoidable,  and 
that  the  evils  resulting  therefrom,  however  much 
they  are  to  be  deplored,  must  be  borne  because 
they  are  inseparable  concomitants  of  infallible 
concentration  and  cannot  be  evaded.  Such  try 
to  make  the  best  of  the  conditions  they  are  in 
because  they  think  it  hopeless  to  try  for  aught 
else. 

Or,  they  may  not  believe  that  the  evils  ot 
society  are  superinduced  by  the  exactions  of 
man  from  man,  but  have  their  fountain  head  in 
some  other  source.  Such  have  no  fault  to  find 
with  exaction  because  they  think  that  is  not 
what  hurts  them. 

Or,  the  individual  who  piles  up  untold  millions 
in  his  name  by  the  plunder  of  a  nation  may  fond- 
ly imagine  he  is  laying  the  foundation  for  his  own 
grand  welfare  and  that  of  his  descendents  for  all 
time  to  come.  That  is  why  he  persists  in  exac- 
ting. He  does  not  perceive  how  his  conduct  re- 
flects to  his  disadvantage  or  foresee  that  he  is 
laying  the  foundation  for  the  ultimate  misfortune, 
ruin  and  misery  of  his  descendents  by  providing 
for  the  entire  demoralization  and  destruction  of 
the  nation  of  which  his  progeny  will  form  a 
part.  If  he  did,  unless  his  nature  was  entirely 
perverted  by  the  monster  breeding  practice  of  ex 
action,  he  would   cease  wanting  to  exact.     If  he 


66  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

knew  what  the  future,  near  and  distant,  proposed 
for  liim,  in  answer  to  his  prevalent  way  of  doing, 
and  also  knew,  that  under  proper  provisions  for 
the  regulation  of  society  he  would  get  rich  none 
the  less  rapidly,  only  all  others  would  not  be  ac- 
cumulating so  slowly  or  be  losing,  he  would  ad- 
vocate a  provison  for  the  prevention  of  exaction. 
He  persists  in  exacting  because  he  sees  no  harm, 
but  only  good  in  it  for  him  and  his. 

Man  may  comprehend  what  is  the  real  wel- 
fare of  himself  and  what  is  the  real  cause  of  his 
ill-conditionedness,  but  fail  to  see  his  way  to  the 
promotion  of  the  one  and  the  extinction  of  the 
other.     His  incapacity  enslaves  him. 

These  reasons,  based  upon  his  erroneousness, 
give  one  account  of  why  man  selects  or  accepts 
the  undesirable  devices  of  encroachment. 

It  may  here  be  asked  b}'  the  less  pretentious 
and  self-esteeming,  "  May  it  not  be  true  that  we 
have  our  betters,  and  would  it  not  be  a  crime  to 
iispire  to  share  with  them  the  superfluities  we 
.are  in  the  habit  of  helping  to  create  but  not  in 
tasting  the  sweetness  thereof  .^" 

I  say,  N'o.  Upon  those  who  hold  or  teach 
this  opinion,  it  is  incumbent  to  show  that  there 
is  a  distinction  in  the  innate  rights  of  individuals. 
Until  that  is  done,  and  satisfactorily,  the  taking 
on  of  superiorness  and  preferment  under  the  doc- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  67 

trine  is  an  unwarranted  and  outrageous   assump- 
tion. 

What  grounds  there  are  for  basing  a  distinc- 
tion upon  is  not  apparent.  That  there  should 
be  a  disparity  in  the  rights  of  individuals  looks 
to  be  out  of  all  harmony  with  what  would  be  the 
deductions  of  an  enlightened  being,  bred  in  other 
regions  than  human,  and  unfamiliar  with  the 
social  status  of  man,  but  whose  conclusions  were 
formed  after  having  subjected  a  specimen  from 
each  of  the  different  races  and  castes  of  human 
beings  to  an  inspection  of  their  physique,  sensa- 
tions and  other  inborn  attributes  and  discovered 
the  likeness  between  them — discovered  that  we 
are  born  into  this  world  with  the  same  powers 
of  growth  and  development,  and  are  possessed 
of  the  same  number  of  mental  and  ph3-sical  en- 
dowments, have  equally  an  aversion  to  pain  and 
discomfort,  and  are  equally  possessed  with  desires 
and  capacities  to  enjoy.  There  is  nothing  in  the 
construction  and  constitution  of  man  to  show 
why  one  should  be  given  the  lead  to  the  other 
in  the  race  of  life,  or  why  one  should  be  obliged 
to  contribute  gratuitous!}'  to  the  equally  able. 
And  if  distinction  in  these  respects  cannot  be 
based  upon  the  constitution  of  man,  it  fails  for 
want  of  grounds.  It  is,  then,  no  wrong  in  any 
man  to  aspire  to  elevate  himself.  What  wrong 
there  is,  is  in  the  wrong  use  of  means. 


68  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

Again,  It  may  be  asked  by  another  set,  the 
more  unsanguine  and  uncourageous,  "  Does  not 
man's  erroneousness  debar  him  ot  hope  for  any 
genuine  and  non-chemerical  betterment  of  his 
condition  ?" 

It  does  not.  He  is  not  so  thoroughly  error- 
going  as  to  preclude  all  chance  for  improvement. 
While  errorneous,  he  is  also  a  being  of  develop- 
ment or  progress.  For  though  he  has  not  been 
capacitated  sufBciently  to  enable  him  to  obviate 
all  error  he  still  has  been  endowed  sufficientl}-  to 
enable  him ,  to  detect  and  discard  errors  and  to 
discover  and  adopt  correctives,  as  time  proceeds, 
and  thus  to  raise  himself,  step  by  step,  to  higher 
planes  of  perfection.  It  is  nature's  plan.  She 
has  chosen  that  we  be  enquiring  students  instead 
of  finished  scholars.  She  has  decreed  that  we 
be  progressive,  that  is,  have  power  to  advance 
but  onl}'  through  a  list  of  mistakes.  In  progres- 
siveness  there  is  inherent  these  two  ideas;  ad- 
vancement and  erroneousness.  It  is  not  all  ad- 
vancement or  there  would  be  no  check;  it  is  not 
all  error  or  there  would  be  no  advance.  It  is  a 
commixture  of  the  two,  making  his  journey  to 
be  an  onward  one,  but  a  tantalizing  one  over  the 
path  of  error.  The  attribute  of  advance  for- 
wards him,  the  attribute  of  erroneousness  per- 
verts him.  The  one  holds  out  to  him  the  posi- 
bility  of  perfection,  the   other    incapacitates  him 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  69 

from  striking  boldly  out  and  establishing  himself 
upon  the  plane  of  perfection  at  once.  Having 
power,  he  advances;  yet  lacking  full  power,  he 
must  advance  step  by  step  and  encounter  -i'lffi.- 
culties,  disappointments,  and  delays  on  the  way- 
No,  man  is  not  debarred  of  hope. 

That  man  is  to  advance,  and  not  remain  sta- 
tionary like  the  lower  animals  of  instinct,  is  a  be- 
lief thoroughly  established  in  our  minds  by  our 
knowledge  and  experiences  of  the  past.  But  if 
we  were  not  satisfied  from  this  source,  the  fact 
of  man's  being  a  creature  of  advancement  is  con- 
clusively proven  by  the  nature  of  his  directing 
talent — his  reason.  That  man  misht  not  remain 
fixed  to  a  one  imperfect  condition,  but  advance 
toward  perfection,  he  is  gifted  with  reason.  But 
it  is  reason  mere/y,  for  if  he  had  perfect  know- 
ledge, he  would  not  advance  through  trials  and 
error,  he  would  stride  up  to  perfection  at  once. 
When  it  is  answered  why  he  was  made  a  pro- 
gressive being  instead  of  a  perfect  being,  it  will 
be  understood  why  he  was  given  reason  instead 
of  perfect  knowledge.  As  it  is  we  must  be  sat- 
isfied with  knowing  that  he  is  provided  with  rea- 
son that  he  may  weigh,  may  consider,  ma}'  make 
use  of  his  knowledge  of  the  past  to  guide  him  as 
to  his  actions  in  the  future  and  so  gain  step  by 
step.  Experience  is  the  ground  work  from 
which  he  reasons.     When  from  experience   he 


JO  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

has  discovered  that  certain  policies  and  actions 
of  his  are  lacking  in  excellence,  calculated  to 
work  him  harm  instead  of  good,  thought  is 
brought  to  bear,  probably  first  by  the  least  un- 
selfish and  most  tortured,  to  discern  or  devise 
methods  for  dissipation  of  objectionable  features 
and  for  substitution  of  improved  conditions.  In 
this  work  men  proceed  as  best  they  know.  As 
the}-  do  not  know  perfectly  they  frequently  err, 
so  they  advance  gradually,  and  they  do  not  al- 
ways avoid  error,  so  we  see  them  frequently 
making  selection  of  unjustifiable  devices. 

What  is  our  remedy,  considered  from  the 
standpoint  of  man's  erroneousness? 

Study,  thought,  education,  dissemination,  for 
purpose  of  discovery  and  dismissal  of  attempts 
that  in  their  nature  are  purel}'  futile,  and  for  pur- 
pose of  discovery  and  adoption  of  improved  means 
for  the  welfare  of  man.  In  these  are  embraced 
about  the  scope  of  effort  for  the  cure  of  the 
faults  which  lie  at  the  door  of  erroneousness. 

PREPONDERANT  STRENGTH  OF  SELF- 
INTEREST. 

The  occasioning  cause  of  man's  resort  to  en- 
croachment upon  his  fellow  for  self  -  gain,  or 
rather  failure  to  forbear  encroachment,  seeing 
that  his  fellow  is  a  being  like  unto  himself,  lies  is 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  7 1 

the  preponderance  of  love  or  regard  for  self  over 
the  love  or  regard  for  what  is  extraneous  of  self. 
We  have  before  stated  that  the  inclinational 
principle  of  man,  known  as  the  principle  of  self- 
preservation,  self-interest,  and  under  kindred 
terms,  was  an  over-mastering  principle  of  man's 
nature.  That  under  a  certain  phase,  there  indi. 
cated,  it  moved  him  steadily  and  sternly  toward 
the  procurement  of  most  for  him,  at  least  ex- 
pense to  him.  Here  is  the  same  principle  mani- 
fested under  another  phase — It  is  love  for  self 
stronger  than  the  love  for  any  outward  thing  or 
person.  We  except  in  this  statement  the  mem- 
bers of  one's  own  family  as  being  connected  by 
ties  too  vital  to  the  welfare  and  happiness  of  self 
to  be  considered  outward.  The}^  are  embraced 
within  the  sphere  of  self-love  and  are  to  be  con- 
strued as  included  in  the  use  of  the  term  self. 
So  construing,  we  are  informed  by  our  expe- 
rience and  self-conciousness  that  the  regard  or 
interest  of  self  is  preponderant  in  one — that 
when  the  balance  is  weighted  with  the  two  re- 
gards, one  for  self  and  one  for  some  person  or 
thingclse;orwiththetwointerests,self-interest  and 
another's  interest,  self  wins.  The  preponderance 
of  regard  in  favor  of  one's  self  is  the  circum. 
stance,  I  conceive,  which  accounts  for  man's 
motive  to  exact  off  his  fellow. 

We  are  not  to  suppose  that  man  takes  an  ardent 


72  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

and  unmixed  delight  in  causing  the  distress  of 
his  brother,  in  form  and  custom,  by  encroach- 
ment upon  him,  for  man  is  imbued  with  commis- 
eration and  pangs  of  remorse  at  his  injury  of  his 
fellow,  especially  before  his  heart  has  become 
hardened  and  feelingless  by  long  practice  at  such 
task.  We  are  to  suppose  that  when  ill  provis- 
ions of  society  invite  the  evil  he  does  not  forego 
the  temptation  to  encroach,  but  embarks  in  the 
evil,  because,  while  he  may  like  to  avoid  distress 
of  his  fellow  he  likes  still  more  to  satisfy  himself. 
His  superior  love  of  self  dominates  his  inferior 
love  for  his  fellow,  and  decides  him  in  regard  to  all 
of  his  acts.  Over-balancing  self-interest,  not 
entire  absence  of  regard  for  others,  occasions 
him  to  encroach,  or  profit  at  the  expense  of  his 
fellow. 

NATURE    OF     REMEDIES     CONSIDERED. 

What  is  the  remedy  for  the  evil  of  encroach- 
ment ? 

Some  will  say,  "educate  self-interest  into  the 
background."  Man}'  persons  believe  that  if  self- 
interest  could  be  made  secondary  in  strength,  or 
could  be  got  to  be  dominated  over  by  sj'mpathy, 
charity,  or  something  that  gave  to  man  a 
superiority  of  regard  for  others,  then  the  state  of 
millennial    happiness  would    be    upon    us.     But 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  73 

those   that   hold    this    view,   I  respectfiill}'    sub- 
mit, labor  under  error. 

For  what  would  be  the  consequence  to  the 
human  race  if  man's  nature  was  suddenl}'  trans- 
formed, for  instance,  so  that  his  self-interest  was 
clear  into  the  background  and  his  love  and  solici- 
tude for  all  persons  and  things  save  himself  were 
superior  to  that  of  the  same  for  himself.  There 
would  be  the  extinction  of  the  human  race.  Be- 
cause, if  man  cared  less  for  himself  than  he  did 
for  all  objects  foreign  to  himself,  he  would  not 
so  much  as  perpetuate  himself.  If  he  loved  to 
have  all  other  things  preserved  as  they  existed 
rather  than  himself  preserved  as  he  existed,  he 
would  suffer  himself  to  die  of  want  before  he 
would  consume  them.  As  he  would  not  perform 
the  important  part  of  perpetuating  himself,  much 
less  would  he  be  likclv  to  look  after  his  welfare 
and  progress  without  superiority  of  self-interest. 

Then  we  may  suppose  his  self-interest  to  have 
been  made  inferior  onl}'  to  his  regard  for  his  fel- 
-  low  man,  being  left  to  hold  the  accustomed  sway 
over  regard  for  the  lower  order  of  things.  He 
would  still  be  no  better  off.  For  if  his  regard 
for  his  fellow  man  was  his  greatest  regard,  he 
would  spend  his  time,  each  preferring  his  aid  to 
others,  on!}'  to  find  all  others  in  the  same  busi- 
ness with  himself,  and  all  to  the  neglect  of  home. 
While  this  was  going  on,  each  mutuall}^  insisting 


74  UNFAIR   DISTRIBUTION. 

that  the  other  should  accept  his  aid,  and  none  did 
accept  because  his  disposition  would  not  allow  of 
it,  and  none  did  do  for  himself  because  his  disposi- 
tion would  not  allow  of  it  while  another  lived  to 
do  for,  the  world  would  grow  up  in  weeds  and 
tares,  and  no  earnings  would  there  be  brought 
forth  to  prevent  man  from  perishing  off  the  face 
of  the  earth.  Even  if  man's  love  for  others  was 
equal  to  his  love  for  self,  it  still  would  avail  him 
nothing  worthy,  for  his  powers  of  operation 
would  be  paralyzed  by  inability  to  choose  whom 
to  serve,  himself  or  another.  Prospects  such  as 
these  confront  us  when  we  think  of  placing  self- 
interest  in  the  background,  supposing  it  could  be 
done,  as  it  cannot,  and  proves  the  desirability  of 
the  superiority  of  regard  for  self. 

Superiority  of  self-esteem  in  man  is  for  .1  wise 
purpose.  Possessed  of  a  self-interest  that  over- 
balances in  its  influence  the  other  principles  of 
his  nature  there  is  precluded  possibility  of  the 
intervention  of  affectionate  principles  to  prevent 
him  from  going  the  length  of  the  destruction  of 
the  lower  order  of  things  when  he  needs  them 
to  apply  for  his  benefit,  and  there  is  precluded 
all  chance  of  cavil  between  individuals,  with  its 
barren  results,  as  to  where  to  dispense  aid,  for 
as  man  is  now  constituted  he  has  no  trouble 
and  loses  no  time  in  making  up  his  mind.  Each 
individual  finds  in  himself  a  person  quite  willing 


I 

UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  75 

and  ready  at  all  times  to  be  the  Immediate  and 
steady  beneficiary  of  all  his  own  efibrts.  This 
would  appear  to  be  one  important  and  vital 
function  of  preponderating  self-interest.  To 
prevent  man's  being  delayed  in  his  operations 
or  held  back  entirely,  to  the  detriment  and  des- 
truction of  himself,  by  considerations  of  regard 
for  outward  things,  or  from  having  his  power  to 
work  paralized  by  inability  to  decide  whom  to 
work  for.  Among  a  million  of  his  fellow  men, 
whatever  may  be  his  regard  for  any  or  all  of 
them  he  experiences  no  trouble,  as  at  present 
constituted,  in  making  a  choice.  Filled  with  a 
superior  self-regard,  he  readily  concludes  that 
he  Is  the  fittest  subject  of  all  to  be  recipient  of 
the  benefits  he  can  confer,  and  amidst  all  things 
in  nature,  however  much  he  may  desire  that 
any  or  all  of  them  may  be  perpetuated,  he  de- 
sires still  more  the  perpetuation  and  happiness 
of  himself  and  therefore  readily  decides  that 
they  must  yield  to  his  convenience. 

It  is  the  plan  that  the  Creator  has  adopted 
for  getting  man  to  accomplish  what  he  was  born 
to  accomplish.  He  moves  man  to  the  accom- 
plishment of  his  purpose  through  getting  each 
one  to  attend  primarily  to  the  welfare  of  himself, 
considering  that  the  independent  welfare  of 
each  will  constitute  the  collective  welfare  of  the 
whole.      And  that  each  ma}-   attend  rigorously 


76  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

to  his  own  welfare,  and  not  have  his  powers  de- 
bilitated by  doubt  as  to  whom  he  should  prefer, 
he  has  created  man  so  that  there  is  no  one  he 
likes  so  well,  and  therefore  is  so  willing  to  serve, 
as  himself. 

We  see  then  that  the  making  of  self-interest 
preponderant  in  man,  is  a  provision  for  the 
safety  of  him,  indispensable,  though  it  does  lead 
him  into  making  gain  from  off  his  fellow. 

NOT   DESIGNED   TO   ENCROACH. 

I  may  be  pardoned  here  for  digressingamo- 
ment  to  remark  upon  an  unfortunate  idea  that 
may  have  caused  itself  about  this  time  to  be 
lurking  in  some  reader's  minds.  The  Idea  re- 
ferred to  is  the  supposition  that  the  circumstance 
which  tends  man  to  encroach,  affords  ground 
for  the  conclusion  that  it  is  part  of  the  Creator's 
design  that  man  should  follow  the  act  of  pro- 
fiting at  the  expense  of  his  fellows.  Such  a  con- 
clusion would  carry  with  it  the  other  that  the 
business  was  permanently  irrevocable,  and  that 
schemes  to  suppress  the  evil  were  the  sanguin- 
ary fruits  of  visionary  minds.  I  cannot  con- 
cede anything  like  this.  I  must  claim  that  we 
cannot  derive  this  conclusion  from  that  circum- 
stance, because  the  circumstance  of  itself 
does  not  offer  enough  for    the   substantiation 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  77 

of  such  a  conclusion,  and  there  fails  to  ap- 
pear support  for  such  conclusions  from  any 
other  source.  Considering  it  established  that 
the  ascendency  of  self-interest  is  indispensable 
to  the  welfare  of  man,  the  tendency  to  encroach 
(the  tendency  not  the  practice)  is  to  be  looked 
upon  as  an  inextirpatable  accompaniament  of  a 
necessary  provision  for  the  safety  of  man. 
Somethinof  that  will  be  because  the  other  must 
be.  Viewed  in  the  light  that  we  are  erroneous, 
the  indisposition  to  forbear  harm  of  ourselves 
by  encroaching  is  just  so  much  proof  that  we 
are  erroneous  Remembering  that  we  are  pro- 
gressive beings,  erroneous  but  advancing,  the 
acts  of  encroachment  arc  to  be  looked  upon  as 
forces  incidentally  diverging  into  wrong  direc- 
tions, owing  to  present  want  of  knowledge  of 
how  to  direct  and  control  them,  but  as  forces 
which  are  susceptible  of  righting  into  usefulness* 
only  we  must  wait  until  we  have  learned  how. 
Our  whole  self-interest  is  analagous  to  many 
objects  in  nature,  which  furnish  us  useful  powers 
but  which  have  these  same  powers  partially 
neutralized  by  others,  which  issue  by  the  side 
of  them,  and  are  as  yet  beyond  our  control,  but 
which  are  certainly  susceptible  of  being  turned 
into  assisting  and  added  powers  as  soon  as  we 
have  learned  the  method  of  how.  We  will  ben- 
efit to   the    full  extent  of   man's   propensity   to 


78  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTIOX. 

serve  himself  as  soon  as  we  get  him  to  divert 
what  powers  he  expends  against  man  away  from 
man,  and  thence  forward  to  expend  all  his  efforts 
for  self-eain  against  the  forces  of  nature  instead 
of  but  a  part. 

To  conclude  the  diversion,  I  will  say  we 
should  fail  in  our  endeavor  if  wc  attempted  to 
supply  reasons  to  show  that  it  is  a  part  of  the 
design  of  his  creation  that  man  should  prosper 
at  the  expense  of  his  fellow,  more  than  tempo- 
rarily, comparing  eras  with  eternity. 

FINES    AND    PENALTIES. 

We  see  that  it  is  folly  to  entertain  the  idea  of 
educating  self-interest  into  the  background.  I 
w^ant  now  to  offer  a  criticism  against  that  method 
of  preventing  encroachment  which  consists  in 
the  use  of  restrictions,  fines  and  penalties.  It  is 
by  understanding  what  are  the  excellences  and 
defects  of  remedies  proposed,  or  in  force  for  the 
protection  of  us,  that  we  are  to  know  what  to 
contend  for  as  useful  and  what  to  discard  as  use- 
less. The  people,  if  they  have  not  a  clear  idea 
of  all  the  ways  they  are  being  imposed  upon,  do 
clearly  recognize  that  they  are  impiously  im- 
posed upon  by  parties  who  have  fortified  them- 
selves in  a  way  to  be  able  to  outrageously  over- 
charge   and  .under-pa}'    in    their   dealings    with 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  79 

others,  and  thus  to  swindle  the  people  through, 
the  medium  of  unfair  prices.  These  parties  are 
the  managers  of  the  combined  or  monophed  rail- 
road, manufacturing,  mining  and  other  important 
industries  of  the  nation.  The  people  at  large  are 
most  anxious  to  sustain  to  these  monopolies  some 
other  relationship  than  that  of  victims  to  their 
extortion,  and  the  plan  popular  with  them  as  the 
plan  proper  for  securing  right  change  of  rela. 
tionship  is  the  one  of  deterring  the  monopolies 
b}'  means  of  penal  codes  into  observing  pre- 
scribed bounds  in  their  setting  of  prices  and  accom- 
modations before  the  public.  The  people  would, 
b}'  means  of  fines  and  penalties  for  infractions  of 
rules  laid  down  for  the  regulation  of  extortioninsf 
individuals  and  corporations,  scare  the  latter  into 
ceasing  their  exactions  and  into  dealing  with  the 
public  upon  such  terms  as  the  public  should 
demand.  This  is  the  plan  popularly  held  in  view 
by  those  who,  in  these  times,  advocate  the  legis- 
lative control  or  government  regulation  of  mon- 
opolies. ^ 

The  plan  is  to  be  condemned  absolutely  be- 
cause it  is  an  unjustifiable  device.  It  is  to  be 
condemned  by  those  who  would  use  it  at  all 
events,  disregarding  its  unjustifiableness,  because 
it  is  a  thoroughly  unavailing  measure. 

The  plan  is  an  unjustifiable  device,  because  the 
real   motive  behind   the  plan — the   motive   that 


8o  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION 

would  necessarily  rule  in  the  event  of  success — is 
not  one  for  prevention  of  extortion,  but  one  for  a 
turning  of  tlie  tables  upon  the  monopolists,  and 
the  bringing  about  a  change  of  places  with  them. 
Some  may  at  first  thought  be  inclined  to  deny  this 
and  to  say  that  the  people  would  be  willing  to 
stop  at  some  midway  and  reasonable  limit  in  their 
demands  upon  the  monopolists,  but  those  who 
talk  that  way  do  so  because  they  have  not  stopped 
to  think  what  kind  of  a  disposition  a  human  being 
has  within  him.  If  we  could  make  the  mono- 
polists accede  to  our  demands,  would  we  stop  in 
our  requirements  short  of  forcing  them  to  become 
the  merest  earners  of  common  subsistence  ? 
Would  we  try  to  profit  any  less  at  their  expense 
than  they  do  now  try  to  profit  at  our  expense? 
No  calm  individual  would  say  we  would.  Our 
knowledge  of  our  self-interest  interposes  a  bar  to 
any  such  conclusion. 

Well,  the  object  need  to  be  sought  is  not  the 
shifting  from  one  hand  to  another  of  the  privilege 
to  extort.  What  is  to  be  sought  is  the  banishment 
of  the  practice  entire  from  society,  as  an  evil 
monstrous  in  itself  and  monstrous  in  the  conse. 
quences  it  entails.  As  the  plan  under  discussion 
is  a  plan  adapted,  so  far  as  it  is  adapted  to  do 
anything,  to  subserve  the  former  purpose  only 
that  should  condemn  it  as  an  entirely  unfit  plan 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  8 1 

in  the  minds  of  all  those  who  have  at  heart  the 
welfare  of  the  people  in  whole. 

But  to  speak  to  those  who  would  make  use  of 
this  plan  to  escape  the  ravages  of  the  monopolists, 
let  any  additional  motives  be  what  they  may. 
The  plan  is  a  thoroughly  unavailing  one,  is  of  no 
worth  as  a  measure  of  enforcement  because  it 
cannot  be  enforced.  ^ 

Why  there  should  be  resistance  at  all  to  our 
endeavors  is  obvious.  In  the  endeavor  to  enforce 
such  a  plan  as  this  we  are  attempting  to  make 
man  forbear  reaping  the  largest  profit  his  oppor- 
tunities will  allow;  directly  antagonizing  that 
strongest  principle  of  his  nature  which  instigates 
him  into  seeking  the  greatest  profit;  setting  self- 
interest  squarely  against  self-interest.  Resistance 
and  conflict  follow  by  the  influence  of  a  law  as 
immutable  as  the  law  ot  gravitation.  The  mon- 
opolist would  not  be  prohibited  from  making  all 
he  can  make,  we  would  not  be  prohibited  from 
restraining  him  within  such  bounds  as  we  thought 
to  be  proper  ones.  The  conflict  remains  a  con- 
flict, with  its  attendant  loss,  expense,  ill-feeling 
and  mischief,  until  there  is  complete  victor}'  for 
one  of  the  parties.  That  is  the  only  way  in 
which  it  can  end.  There  can  be  no  compromis- 
ing or  midway  standard  established  up  to  which 
parties  can  be  got  to  go  without  attempting  to  go 


82  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

further.     The  self-interest  of  man  will  not  permit 
of  that. 

Invariably  the  contest  goes  against  us.  That 
is  cold  Jiistory.  Whoever  heard  of  a  law  fixing 
the  rate  of  interest,  the  conduct  of  railroads,  the 
amount  to  be  paid  for  wages,  the  prices  to  be  set 
upon  monopoly  made  wares,  or  for  controlling 
monopolists  in  any  way  that  held  for  any  length 
of  time  or  did  any  appreciable  good.^ 

Why  we  always  fail  will  be  plainl}'  understood 
when  we  see  that  the  advantages  are  all  against 
us.  We  account  for  the  presence  of  the  monopo- 
lists in  the  first  place,  by  those  misprovisions  of 
ours  which  promote  their  growth'  instead  of  dis- 
promote  the  same.  Growth  takes  place  under  a 
fostering  care  and  it  is  onl}^  after  the}'  have  at- 
tained the  power  to  make  themselves  excessive- 
ly ofTensive  that  restrictive  measures  begin  to  be 
projected  against  them.  Thentheir  power  stands 
them  just  so  much  ahead  in  their  contests  with 
the  people.  They  have  the  monopol}',  which  in 
itself  is  an  immense  lever  of  advantage.  They 
have  besides,  the  wealth  which  the  monopol}'  has 
brought  them;  the  prestige  which  wealth  brings 
them,  the  passion  for  extorting  which  the  busi- 
ness of  extorting  generates,  and  the  qualifications 
in  the  art  of  forefending,  puerilizing  and  def^'ing 
restrictive  measures,  which  a  special  study  of  the 
art  has  given  them.     These  combined  advantages 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  83 

fit  them  to  oppose  such  formidable  obstacles 
from  beginning  to  end,  to  all  eilorts  of  the  people 
to  legislate  them  into  obedience  to  demands  as  to 
render  them  upon  the  whole  invincible.  Upon  dis- 
cussion in  the  field,  their  large  profits  enable  them 
to  emplo}^  the  best  talent  to  manufacture  opinion 
in  their  favor.  At  the  polls  there  is  the  influence 
of  prestige,  money  and  menace  of  employes 
and  dependents.  In  the  legislative  halls,  means, 
influence  and  sophistry  prepared  to  order,  are  not 
lacking  for  the  purchase,  cajolement  and  decep- 
tion of  those  elected  pledged  to  the  peoples'  in- 
terests. In  the  courts,  there  are  judges  and  juries 
to  mystify  and  bribe.  As  a  last  resource  the 
people  can  be  defied,  for  sec  how  well  their  mo- 
nopoly stands  them  in  hand.  B}'  means  of  it 
they  can  tax  up  all  costs  of  contest,  both  the 
peoples'  cost  and  their  own,  to  the  people.  This 
is  their  grand  advantage.  They  can  exhaust  the 
peoples'  treasur}'  while  they  leave  their  own  un- 
impaired. As  it  requires  monied  means,  as  well 
as  pluck  and  energy  to  carry  on  the  contest,  this 
advantage  they  have  alone,  not  counting  others, 
renders  it  only  a  question  of  time  when  the  peo- 
ple must  give  up  disabled  every  time  they  under- 
take restrictive  measures  against  the  monopo- 
lists. 

About  the  only  objection  the  monopolists  can 
have  to  these  contests  is  that  it  forces  them  to  ex- 


^  84  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

pend  a  portion  of  their  gains  as  fees  to  counsel  and 
for  corruption  purposes,  when  they  might  other- 
wise pocket  the  whole  of  their  gains  as  clear 
profit.  On  account  of  the  utter  unfitness  of  the 
contests  to  minister  to  any  sort  of  advantage  to 
the  people,  either  right  or  wrong,  they  should  be 
abandoned  by  the  latter.  To  get  restrictive  codes 
passed  into  law  requires  neglect  of  regular  affairs, 
war  of  feeHng,  and  expense.  When  the  codes 
are  enacted,  of  what  worth  are  they.^  They  are 
laws  of  the  land  some  will  assert  with  an  air  of 
confidence  calculated  to  amuse  people  who  have 
watched  the  effect  of  a  great  many  of  our  laws. 
They  are  a  part  of  the  law  of  the  land  when  made 
so,  it  is  true,  and  an  aggrieved  individual  can 
have  recourse  to  them  for  redress  whenever  he 
thinks  it  is  to  his  interest  to  pit  himself,  and  what 
he  can  command,  hgainst  a  power  that  makes  of 
the  art  of  worrying  prosecutions  and  parrying  the 
effects  of  laws  a  special  craft,  and  that  can  hire 
and  bribe  without  stint,  by  virtue  of  having  it  in 
hand  to  make  the  people  foot  the  bills.  But  ag- 
grieved parties  do  not  find  to  their  interest  to 
have  such  recourse.  What  little  experience  some 
have  had  in  the  business  is  of  a  sort  to  discourage 
most  people  from  undertaking  more  of  it.  The 
laws  in  consequence  virtuall}'  become  a  dead  let- 
ter as  soon  as  they  are  passed. 

In  conclusion,  on  this  point  I  will  say,  that  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  8 


D 


attempt  to  legislate  monoplies  into  control  by 
means  of  restrictions  and  penalties  should  be 
abandoned  because  such  work  is  only  an  idling 
away  of  the  people's  time  at  the  people's  expense. 
A  better,  because  the  genuine,  reason  for  the 
abandonment  of  the  plan  is,  that  it  is  not  a  plan 
fitted  for  the  extirpation  of  the  practice  of  extor 
tion,  since  if  it  could  be  successfully  enforced  it 
would  only  result  in  transferring  the  business  of 
extorting  from  one  set  of  hands  to  another  set  of 
hands. 

THE    PROPER    WAY. 

What  are  we  to  do  then  for  the  betterment  of 
our  situation,  considering  the  circumsta'nces  so 
far  brought  up  as  factors  to  be  taken  into  account? 
Recognize  that  there  is  in  man  a  self-interest,  and 
that  this  self-interest  disposes  him  steadily  and 
sternly  into  seeking  to  realize  the  greatest  profit 
for  himself.  Recognize  that  the  making  of  us 
thus  to  wish  to  profit,  is  a  wise  operation,  design- 
ed for  the  safet}'  and  welfare  of  us.  Recognize 
that  self-interest  is  an  over-mastering  principle 
and  sways  man  in  the  pursuit  of  his  purpose. 
We  will  then  be  prepared  to  further  recognize 
that  it  is  neither  desirable  to  dissuade  men  from 
attempting  to  gain  the  greatest  profit,  or  possi- 
ble to  prevent   them  from  getting  the    greatest 


86  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION 

profit  their  opportunities  will  aftbrd  their  getting. 

When  we  have  brou'j^ht  all  these  sources  of 
view  to  bear  upon  our  judgments,  I  think  we 
must  be  convinced  that  the  proper  course  to  pur- 
sue is  to  fall  in  with  the  provisions  of  nature  as 
we  find  them,  and  make  our  provisions  to  har- 
monize w4th  them.  That  is,  instead  of  tr3-ing  to 
resist  and  contrarize  man  as  actuated  by  his  self- 
interest  w^e  should  place  our  self  in  such  an  at- 
titude that  we  will  be  favorably  affected  by  him 
as  thus  actuated.  We  will  then  be  in  a  position 
to  wish  him  all  speed  in  his  endeavors,  and  to 
give  a  hand  to  accelerate  him  in  his  progress, 
since  the  more  a  man  would  do  for  himself  under 
such  provision  the  more  would  he  be  benefiting 
society. 

The  specific  provision  needed  to  bring  us  into 
proper  and  favorable  relations  with  men,  as  insti- 
gated by  their  self-interest,  is  a  fair  tax  law.  Did 
fair  taxation  prevail  men  would  voluntarily  refuse 
to  combine  industries  into  consolidated  wholes,  be- 
cause under  such  form  the  industries  would  yield 
less  profit  than  they  would  if  maintained  in  inde- 
pendent and  separately  working  concerns.  Void 
the  consolidations,  we  would  be  rid  of  the  ex. 
tortion  which  can  only  be  possible  where  there 
are  consolidations.  We  would  have,  by  working 
in  harmony  with  natural  laws  of  cause  and  effect, 
what  we  cannot  gain  in  any  other  way. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  87 

Self-interest  is  an  over-influencin£f  force  in  man 
that,  like  many  other  powers  in  nature,  serves  us 
good  or  ill  according  as  it  is  met  with  proper  or 
improper  provisions.  Good  provisions  invite 
good,  false  provisions  invite  monstrous  harm. 

Fair  taxation,  as  a  measure  of  itself,  would  be 
a  good  in  the  place  of  the  evil  of  unfair  taxation. 
As  a  measure  to  cause  effect,  it  would  relieve  us 
of  the  impositions  of  monopolists  by  disinclining 
people  to  make  of  themselves  monopolists.  It 
would  lead  to  industrial  freedom,  because  that  is 
the  state  that  would  prevail  in  the  absence  of 
monopoly.  Under  industrial  freedom  man  would 
from  the  very  condition  of  things,  operate  solely 
against  nature  and  in  such  manner  as  to  promote 
the  solid  welfare  of  the  race. 


CHAPTER  III. 


DIVISION    OF   LABOR. 


A  justifiable  device  of  man  for  the  profit  of 
himself  is  the  division  of  labor.  The  farmer  has 
his  occupation,  the  merchant  his,  the  manu- 
facturer his,  the  professor  his,  the  cobbler  his,  the 
day  worker  his  and  so  on  through  a  long  list.  The 
advantages  of  division  of  labor  are  so  apparent 
and  commonly  well  understood,  as  to  render  it  un- 
necessary to  take  up  time  with  remarks  upon  this 
special  phase  of  the  subject.  All  know  to  what 
a  deplorable  condition  we  would  be  reduced  were 
each  individual  of  societ}^  forced  to  produce 
within  himself,  and  with  his  own  hands,  everything 
he  used  for  the  satisfaction  of  himself. 

Division  of  labor  is  the  root  or  cause  of  several 
of  the  incidents  and  affairs  which  prevail  in 
society.  First  among  these  is  the  necessity  to 
exchange  products.  As  under  the  system  of  di- 
vision of  labor  individuals  confine  themselves  to 
special  lines  of  eftbrt,  each  one  produces  an  excess 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  89 

of  his  own  kind  and  has  lacks  of  the  kind  others 
produce.  To  get  desires  evenly  ministered  to, 
then,  the  business  of  exchange  is  brought  into  re- 
quisition, to  make  excesses  in  one  place  go  to  till 
up  lacks  in  another. 

Out  of  this  requirement  to  exchange  grows  the 
opportunity  to  cheat,  as  practiced  through  over- 
charging for  what  is  parted  with  and  under-pa3'ing 
for  what  is  purchased.  Monopoly  is  the  main  in- 
strumentality used  to  enforce  compliance  with  the 
desire  to  over-charge  and  under-pay. 

POWERLESSNESS    TO    DISCOVER    VALUES 
OF    EARNINGS. 

A  circumstance  incident  to  the  division  of  labor, 
or  probabl}'  more  properly  to  this  and  exchange 
combined,  is  powerlessness  to  calculate  what  are 
shares  or  separate  amounts  of  earnings.  This 
fact  is  worthy  to  be  borne  in  mind  as  being  one 
of  sufficient  importance  to  exercise  a  deciding  in- 
fluence in  certain  matters  of  social  regulation. 
We  are  without  knowledge  of,  and  without  op- 
portunity to  find  out,  what  are  distinctive  values 
or  amounts,  as  educed  by  different  units  of  labor 
and  capital,  during  specific  periods  of  engagement. 
We  cannot  tell  what  is  a  man's  real  earnings  as 
brought  forth  b}'  the  vocation  in  which  he  is  en- 
gaged.   We  cannot  tell  what  are  the  earnings  of 


90  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

capital,  land,  or  money,  as  evoked  by  each  by 
itself,  and  when  men  attempt  to  decide  what 
portion  of  earnings  in  general  belong  to  profit, 
what  to  rent,  what  to  interest,  what  to  wages 
and  elsewhere,  they  place  themselves  upon  a  par 
with  the  weather  predictors  and  fortune  tellers, 
for  they  can  do  no  more  than  guess  from  the  un- 
known to  the  unknown. 

The  reason  we  cannot  determine  what  are  in- 
dependent amounts  of  earnings,  is  that  the 
agencies  or  forces  concerned  in  earning  do  not 
afford  us  data  for  artificial  calculations  upon  the 
subject,  and  present  provisions  do  not  discover 
them  to  us  in  any  other  way.  The  pay  a  man 
receives  for  what  he  parts  with  afibrds  no  criterion 
by  which  to  judge  of  the  real  worth  of  the  thing 
parted  with,  for  how  could  the  pay  be  a  guide 
under  a  system  of  exchange  in  which  values  are 
distorted  all  out  of  shape  by  the  rulings  of  extor- 
tionate men  in  power  ?  Values  are  far  out  of 
their  proper  proportions.  That  we  can  be  sure 
-of  because  we  are  aware  that  immense  instru- 
mentalities of  extortion  prevail  for  the  making 
of  them  so.  But  what  their  -proper  proportions 
are  must  remain,  under  present  conditions,  a 
quandary  to  us,  because  no  recourse  to  some 
fundamental  information  to  begin  with  can  be 
had,  as  a  basis  for  figures  and  calculation. 

This  much  information   our  reasoning  faculty 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  9 1 

lets  us  into  :  the  total  of  earnings  in  the  com- 
munity for  a  given  period  is  the  aggregated  earn- 
ings of  the  individuals  of  the  communit}'  for  the 
given  period;  and,  as  a  deduction,  the  earnings  of 
each  individual  is  the  share  he  has  contributed 
to  the  aggregated  or  total  of  earnings  for  the  pe- 
riod. But  while  this  information  may  lead  us 
to  a  better  understanding  of  the  relationship 
between  man  and  his  earnings,  and,  be  therefore, 
of  service  in  its  special  field,  it  throws  no  light 
upon  the  value  of  an  earning  as  an  isolated  fact. 
What  is  the  definite  or  absolute  value  an}'  one 
has  contributed  to  the  collection  or  sum  of  values 
at  any  given  time,  through  the  injection  of  his 
labor,  his  skill  or  his  capital  into  productive  en- 
terprises, or  through  industry  at  merchandising,  at 
medicine,  at  pulpit,  at  science,  at  bar,  or  at  other 
vocations,  is  be3"ond  the  power  of  man  to  decide 
by  any  mode  under  existing  provisions. 

Now,  if  under  existing  provisions  or  laws  of 
society  earned  amounts^  as  embraced  in  wages, 
interest,  rent,  profits  or  other  rewards  cannot,  as 
separate  entities,  be  made  known  to  us,  have  we 
not  in  this  fact  another  invincible  argument  against 
the  theory  of  legislative  regulation  of  prices.^  I 
make  this  point  here  again  because  I  know  that  a 
prevalent  opinion  among  men  is  that  combinations 
must  be  curbed  by  the  fixing  of  prices  for  their 
observance  in  their  dealings  with  the  public,  and 


92  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

because  I  would  have  persons  see  the  futility  of 
such  a  course  and  abandon  it  on  account  of  its 
futility.  I  have  before  shown  some  of  the  ob- 
jections to  this  popular  plan  of  government 
control,  and  powerlessness  to  discover  shares  of 
earnings,!  urge  as  another  cogent  objection  to  ^t. 
For  if  we  cannot  discern  what  proper  prices 
are  is  it  not  true  that,  though  we  could  get  the 
extortionists  to  accede  to  our  demands,  and 
though  our  motives  were  pei-fect,  we  would 
err  so  grievously  as  not  to  make  any  material 
improvement  upon  present  conditions.^  Would  we 
not  lack  so  much  that  was  proper  to  be  ob- 
served in  our  attempts  to  exercise  a  fair  and  im- 
partial discrimination  in  the  setting  of  prices  as  to 
cause  us  to  avert  but  little  of  the  dangers  of  un- 
fair distribution?  My  judgment  tells  me  that 
were  all  difficulties  cleared  from  the  field  but  only 
this  one  of  powerlessness  to  fore-calculate  values 
of  earnings,  it  alone  would  make  all  attempts 
to  regulate  prices  end  in  egregious  failure. 

In  view  of  the  difficulties  here  presented,  then, 
what  is  the  remedy  for  extortionate  dealing? 
As  recommended  in  view  of  the  difficulties  pre- 
viously examined,  the  answer  must  be  as  before, 
fair  taxation.  Fair  taxation  would  generate  a 
state  of  industrial  liberty  and  thereby  open  the 
door  for  the  exercise  of  supreme  competitive 
processes      whose      functions    it    were    to    dis- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  93 

tribute  values  to  the  sources  of  their 
origin  and  to  do  this  without  recourse  to  fore- 
calculation.  As  this  would  be  affecting  the  hon" 
est  object  of  fore-known  values,  it  would  be  af- 
fecting a  satisfactory  solution  of  all  that  was  in- 
volved in  the  attempt  to  fore-calculate  values  by 
recourse  to  a  different  and  practicable  plan. 
The  specific  forms  of  competitive  processes  will 
be  made  the  subject  of  future  explanation. 

We  say  that  under  present  provisions  man 
could  not  by  any  mode  discover  the  values  of  in- 
dividual earnings.  How  can  he  under  provisions 
of  industrial  liberty.^  By  observing  the  harvest 
of  man's  effort,  or  expenditure  of  means.  By 
seeing  what  wages, interest,  profits  and  so  on,were 
after  they  had  become  fixed  as  com^pensations  or 
rates  of  compensation  by  man  operating  in  obed- 
ience to  a  principle  whose  function  it  is  to  dis" 
tribute  rewards  to  the  sources  of  their  author- 
ship. That  is  the  only  way  they  can  be  made 
known  to  us.  When  we  have  instituted  a  law 
or  regulation  that  will  impel  to  identit}^  of  reward 
with  earnings,  then  we  can  learn  what  earned 
values  are  by  observing  what  persons  receive  as 
rewards  for  their  energy  and  capital.  Obvious- 
ly the  system  which  will  discover  to  us  the  earn- 
ings of  each  person  by  giving  to  each  a  compen- 
sation equal  to  his  earnings  is  the  proper  S3'stem 
to  establish  for  the  government  of  society,  if  we 


94  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

believe  that  people  should  be  rewarded  according 
to  their  earnings. 

MONEY. 

Another  circumstance  founded  upon  division  of 
labor  is  the  need  of  money.  As  division  of  labor 
makes  necessary  the  business  of  exchange,  so 
there  must  be  a  symbolic  medium  of  exchange,  a 
something  that  people  agree  shall  stand  in  the 
place  of  earnings  and  register  them,  and  be  a  sign 
that  the  bearer  has  parted  with  so  much  actual 
value  to  society  somewhere,  and  is  entitled  to  so 
much  value  from  society  elsewhere.  The  amount 
of  money  needed  by  a  people  should,  like  rates 
of  wages,  profits  and  so  on,  be  left  to  the  working 
of  natural  laws.  No  set  of  law  makers  or  other 
men  can  tell  us  how  much  currency  we  should 
have.  It  should  be  left  to  the  decision  of  natural 
laws,  under  a  provision  which  brought  natural 
law  into  the  ascendency.  Reference  will  be 
again  made  to  this  subject. 

WORTHS    OR    VALUES. 

Worths  or  values  may  be  divided  into  natural, 
artificial  and  earned.  Natural  worths  are  such 
as  are  caused  to  be  displa3'ed  b}'  man  subjected 
to  the  free  operation  of  natural  laws.  What  na- 
tural worths  are  we  have  no  certainty  that  we 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


95 


have  any  knowledge  of,  because  the  operation  of 
natural  laws  has  always  been  thwarted  by 
exactors. 

Artificial  worths  are  such  as  are  made  in  the 
interests  of  exactors.  Under  a  system  of  unfair 
distribution,  or  reward  out  of  harmon}' with  earn- 
ings, it  is  not  known  whether  any  compensations 
are  ever  rated  at  their  real  values,  while  a  certainty 
exists,  that  man}'  of  them  are  rated  widely,  and 
some  very  widely,  of  their  real  values. 

Earned  worths  are  the  values  attaching  to  ser- 
vices or  articles  by  virtue  of  the  amount  and 
quality  of  energy  undergone  or  expenditure 
made.  Under  the  influences  engendered  by  a 
state  of  industrial  liberty,  natural  worths  and 
earned  worths  would  nearly  coincide,  that  is,  the 
valuation,  buying  and  selling  of  things  would  be 
at  their  natural  worths  and  very  nearly  always  at 
their  earned  worths.  This  is  because  discrepancy 
between  natural  worth  and  earned  worth  would 
only  occur  where  people  had  miscalculated  as  to 
supph'  and  demand,  or  where  freaks  of  nature 
interfered  with  people's  calculations.  Man's 
powers  of  foresight  is  sufficiently  acute,  and  the 
responses  of  nature  are  sufficiently  uniform 
however  to  prevent  a  wide  breach  being  made 
between  suppl}'  and  demand  where  there  is 
freedom  of  operation. 


g6  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

CAPITAL. 

Another  justifiable  device  of  man  for  accele- 
rating his  welfare  is  the  diversion  of  a  portion  of 
his  productive  efforts  toward  supplying  himself 
with  means  of  help  at  earning.  Thus  man  does 
not  occupy  his  whole  time  in  producing  for  his 
immediate  personal  wants:  he  occupies  a  portion 
of  his  time  in  supplying  himself  with  tools,  ma- 
chinery, and  all  sorts  of  appliances  that  can  be  of 
help  to  him  in  ministering  to  his  personal  wants. 
These  helping  appliances  are  what  are  called  his 
capital.  They  do  not  minister  directly  to  the 
satisfaction  of  his  personal  wants,  as  food  and 
clothes  which  can  be  eaten  and  worn ;  they  minister 
indirectly  by  being  the  work  animals,  tools  and 
machinery  that  aid  in  the  procurement  of  food 
and  clothes  and  other  things  which  satisfy  his 
immediate  wants.  The  special  value  of  capital 
consists  in  its  power  to  enable  man  to  produce 
faster  and  better,  and  with  less  hardship  to  him- 
self than  he  could  do  without  it  as  an  instrument 
of  help.  Capital .  is  a  want  of  man  as  much  as 
direct  subsistence  like  food,  and  clothes  and 
shelter.  If  we  call  man's  direct  personal  wants 
his  immediate  wants,  capital  can  be  appropriately 
called  his  ^mediate  wants. 

Man's  power  to  earn  or  produce  is  greater 
than  his  power  to  utilize  or  use  up,  if  both  pro- 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  97 

cesses  are  addressed  to  a  single  or  a  stationary 
class  of  articles.  Thus,  place  a  set  of  men  and 
their  families  out  by  themselves  and  order  them 
to  produce  of  corn,  meat,  and  one  style  of  cloth- 
ing and  shelter,  and  they  will  under  ordinary 
circumstances,  and  with  an  ordinary  amount  of 
means  and  effort,  produce  more  than  they  can 
eat  and  wear  and  hide  themselves  under.  This 
comes  from  nature's  responding  with  a  greater 
force  than  that  with  which  she  is  struck — from 
her  repaying  whatever  expenditure  is  made  up- 
on her  ivWi  interest.  It  is  the  over-responding- 
ness  of  nature  that  gives  birth  to  capital.  If 
nature  were  not  thus  over-responsive  or  gain- 
giving,  there  could  never  be  any  capital  or  in- 
crease of  capital,  and  therefore  no  progress  in 
the  human  race.  If  savages  had  never  had 
time  to  spare,  outside  of  what  was  needed  to 
feed  and  clothe  them  in  the  simplest  manner, 
to  invent  and  construct  tools  and  implements, 
we  would  be  savages  still.  Capital  is  savings, 
what  can  be  spared  as  a  helper  to  production 
after  present  wants  are  satisfied. 

The  over-respondingness  of  nature,  com- 
bined with  man's  power  to  devise  against  na- 
ture, conspire  to  make  man  as  a  producing 
agent,  vastly  more  than  equal  to  the  task  of 
providing  for  his  stringent  necessities.  This 
is  proven  by  the  fact  that  the  enforced   periods 


98  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

of  idleness,  so  regularly  precipitated  among  so 
many,  the  unlucrativeness  of  capital  diverted 
into  improper  channels  everywhere,  and  the 
disadvantages  that  we  labor  under  from  wrong 
government  generally,  while  furnishing,  as  they 
do,  reliefs  and  clogs  and  stays  to  accumulatidn, 
not  only  do  not  deprive  us  of  a  living,  but  leave 
us  to  be  periodically  overwhelmed  with  all  sorts 
of  over-production.  These  facts  give  evidence 
that  our  capacity  to  produce  necessities  is  vast- 
ly ahead  of  our  need  for  necessities. 

AMPLIFICATION    OF   WANTS. 

But  the  statement  is  not  made  that  man  cannot 
consurfte  as  fast  as  he  can  earn,  it  is  that  he  can- 
not consume  the  total  of  one  line  of 'common 
support,  like  that  of  necessaries,  if  all  his  ener- 
gies are  confined  to  procuring  in  one  line  of 
common  support.  Man  has  it  in  his  power  to 
amplify  his  wants,  to  enlarge  his  capacity  for 
receiving  satisfactions,  and  to  invent  new  ways 
of  beinor  oratified  when  he  finds  that  his  means 
are  in  excess  of  those  needed  for  accustomed 
wants.  This  power  to  amplify  affords  a  perma- 
nent outlet  to  the  fullest  development  of  his 
power  to  earn.  It  enables  him,  when  free  to 
act  out  the  designs  of  nature,  to  expand  his 
wants,  both  mediate  and  immediate,  with  a  de 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  99 

gree  of  celerity  that  will  prevent  them  from  ever 
being  overtaken  by  the  expansion  of  his  earn- 
ingpowers. 

The  amplification  of  the  wants  of  man  may 
be  divided  into  that  of  his  immediate,  or  bodily 
wants,  and  that  of  his  mediate  or  capital  wants. 
The  amplication  of  the  bodily  wants  answers  to 
the  development  of  the  desires  or  needs  of  the 
person.  It  consists  in  the  refinement  of  exist- 
ing ways  of  receiving  satisfaction  and  the  add- 
ing on  of  new  ways  of  receiving  satisfaction. 
Thus  man,  when  he  finds  that  he  can  earn  more 
of  coarse  or  rude  clothes,  food  and  shelter  than 
he  needs  has  not  to  idle  away  time  on  that  ac- 
count. Finer  clothes,  more  delicate  and  varied 
foods,  more  comfortable  shelter  will  add  to  his 
enjoyments  and  length  of  life,  and  of  these  it  re- 
quires more  labor  to  procure  than  it  does  for 
things  coarse  and  rude.  Then,  man  loves  to 
please  the  ear  with  music,  the  sight  with  paint- 
ings, the  taste  with  adornments.  He  loves  to 
aft'ord  himself  books  and  newspapers,  to  appear 
respectable  at  church,  and  to  exchange  hospital- 
ities with  his  neighbors  in  becoming  style  He 
loves  to  be  so  fixed  with  abodes  that  h«  can 
properly  protect  himself  and  everything  about 
him  from  the  inclemencies  of  the  weather.  He 
desires  to  be  relieved  from  over-toil,  and  to  be 
able  to  spend  a  proper  proportion  of  his  time  in 


TOO  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

recreation  and  leisure.  He  wants  to  be  able 
to  assist  in  providing  such  sanitary  regulations 
as  are  an  effectual  safeguard  ao^ainst  ill-health. 
He  loyes  to  educate  his  children ;  he  loves  to 
travel  and  to  see.  He  wants,  in  short,  the 
country  to  be  rich,  and  every  home  a  rich  man's 
home.  Well,  all  these  make  such  an  enormous 
draft  upon  his  earning  power,  to  say  nothing  of 
unapparent  wants,  or  such  as  may  be  expected 
to  arise  w^hen  existino;  ones  are  satisfied  that, 
so  far  we  can  see,  he  may  invent  and  devise  to 
the  end  of  the  world,  and  yet  never  be  nausea- 
ted wqth  surplus  or  compelled  to  be  unwillingly 
idle. 

The  amplification  of  mediate  or  capital  w^ants, 
for  such  there  must  be  also,  answers  to  the  de- 
velopment of  means  and  machinery  for  the  con- 
struction, preparation  and  protection  of  things 
answering  to  the  refined  and  added  agencies  or 
wants  of  the  person.  For  the  manufacture  of 
finer  clothes,  improved  machiner}^  is  needed.  For 
the  production  and  preparation  of  finer  foods, 
and  in  greater  variety,  improved  tillage  as  well  as 
improved  machiner}'  and  facilities  are  needed. 
Indeed  expansion  of  personal  wants  can  only  be 
had  as  there  is  kept  up  a  corresponding  expansion 
of  capital  to  be  used  as  an  instrumentality  in 
ministering  to  the  former.  If  we  would  enjoy  the 
comforts  and  advantages  of  good  transportation. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  lOI 

we  must  have  good  means  of  transportation, 
such  as  good  roads,  good  bridges,  good  con- 
veyances. If  we  would  have  the  enjoyments,  and 
comforts,  and  protection  of  good  shelter  we  must 
have  good  sheltering  structures,  as  good  barns, 
sheds,  warerooms,  storehouses  and  other  conser- 
vatories. If  we  would  have  superior  goods  we 
must  have  superior  factories  and  tools  for  the 
manufacture  of  them.  If  we  would  have  all  our 
wants  supplied  it  is  essential  that  we  have  ma- 
chinery that  will  work  rapidly,  as  well  as  del- 
icatel}'  ;  that  the  soil  be  made  to  yield  In  abun- 
dance as  well  as  in  variety,  that  transportation  be 
brisk  as  well  as  certain  and  safe,  so  that  the  least 
possible  amount  of  time  need  be  taken  up  with 
each  particular  want.  We  see  then,  that  there  is 
a  scope  for  the  increase  of  man's  mediate  means 
as  well  as  for  increase  of  his  immediate  means  of 
satisfaction,  which  makes  it  additionally  clear 
that  there  need  be  no  overplus  on  account  of  the 
inability  of  a  people  to  consume  as  fast  as  they 
can  produce. 

It  is  true  that  we  have  over-production  and  un- 
willing idleness  of  men  on  account  thereof,  but 
that  comes  from  another  cause  than  over-earninor 
power,  a  fact  that  i.s  rendered  sufficiently  evident 
when  we  remember  that  the  icllcness  is  not  joined 
with  the  enjoyment  of  superabundance,  a  con- 
nection that  would  certainly  take  place  if  there 


I02  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

was  real  and  natural  over-production.  Over- 
production and  idleness  aside  of  indigence  and 
starvation  will  never  afford  grounds  for  the  build- 
ing up  of  a  theory,  except  a  most  hollow  one, 
that  people  are  producing  more  than  they  want. 
Nature  has  so  constructed  man  as  to  relieve  him 
from  necessity  of  ever  being  afflicted  with  com- 
pulsory Idleness  of  self,  or  with  sight  of  waste  of 
the  fruits  of  his  industry,  where  the  conditions  of 
society  are  aright. 

BALANCE    BETWEEN    CAPITAL    AND    NEED 

OF    IT. 

Where  there  is  freedon  of  pursuit  the  extra 
product,  the  part  resulting  from  man's  over-earn- 
ing power,  will  not  be  devoted  wholly  to  the 
increase  of  personal  gratification  or  wholly  to 
increase  of  capital.  It  will  be  divided  propor- 
tionately. If  all  extra  product  from  any  time 
forward  were  applied  to  the  immediate  grat- 
ification of  man,  there  could  thenceforward  be 
no  increase  of  capital  and  therefore  no  more  im- 
provements in  the  gratification  of  men.  Such  a 
mode  of  doing  would  not  be  practiced  by  men, 
however,  since  their  dispositions  impel  them  to 
continuously  improve  and  develop  themselves. 
If  all  extra  products  were  applied  to  increase  of 
capital  alone  there  still  could  be  no  improvement 
in  the  condition  and  development  of   man,  since 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  IO3 

capital  is  not  the  means  of  gratif3'ing  man's  im- 
mediate wants,  but  the  means  of  producing  the 
means  to  gratify  his  immediate  wants,  when  so 
used.  Man  wants  advance,  therefore  is  actuated 
into  the  proper  use  of  nature's  provisions,  viz:  pro- 
gressive earning  power,  to  promote  his  advan- 
cement. This  proper  use  consists  in  dividing  the 
extra  product  into  two  such  proportionate  parts 
between  mediate  and  immediate  means  of  satis- 
faction, as  to  cause  there  to  be  neither  lack  nor 
surplus  in  either  place,  but  perfect  balance. 

I  assume  of  course,  that  there  is  no  distinction 
in  the  innate  rights  of  individuals,  and  that  in  that 
expansion  of  sources  of  satisfaction  which  will 
serve  to  absorb  ail  the  products  of  effort,  one  in- 
dividual should  not  be  made  to  give  way  to 
another.  If  you  afhrm  and  enforce  the  principle, 
however,  that  the  masses  of  industrious  are  well 
enough  provided  for  when  they  are  sheltered  in 
the  most  must-needs-be  manner,  clad  in  the  merest 
sufficiency  and  have  their  throats  made  the  road 
way  of  the  commonest  diet;  if  after  these  barest 
sufficiencies  have  been  produced  you  disallow 
them  the  right  to  divert  their  efforts  to  the  bet- 
terment of  their  conditions  by  improving  the 
quality  of  their  homes,  their  clothing,  their  food 
and  all  that  relates  to  themselves  ;  if  none  are 
entitled  to  any  betterments,  except  a  self-con- 
stituted upper  class  ;  and  if  after  the  lattcr's  de- 


I04  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

mands  for  betterments  are  satiated  the  balance  of 
the  efforts  of  the  common  herd  are  to  be  confined 
to  the  production  of  such  things  as  are  adjudo-ed 
to  be  the  only  fit  things   for  them  to  have,   then 
the  people  cannot  consume  as  much  as  they  can 
produce.      Because,  as  has  been  shown,  map  is 
vastly  superior  to  the  task   of  providing  for  his 
commonest  necessities.     So  productive  is  man's 
effort  that  a  portion  of  the  people,  far  less  than  the 
whole  number,  or  the  time  of  all  far  less  than  full 
time,    devoted    to    the    purpose^  is  sufficient   to 
provide   a   full  supply  of   the  necessities  of   life. 
Then  as  has  been  said,  if  the  necessities  of  life  are 
all  that  the  masses  are  to  have  and  produce  for 
themselves,  there  will  be   an  over-supply  of  ne- 
cessities.    If  on  the  contraiy,  it  is  believed  that 
no  man  has  rights  over  another,  and  a  law  is  en- 
forced which  gives  to  each  his  deserts,  there  will 
be  no  surplus  of  necessities.     Because  the  spare 
efforts  of  men  will  be  directed  to  the  betterment 
of  their  conditions.       They  will  make  provision, 
first,  for  better  homes  and  better  living,  then  for 
improvement     of    their  intellects  and  the  grat- 
ification of  higher  wants.     The  labor  and  capital 
directed    to   these  purposes,  will  be  withdrawn 
from  the  production  of  the  commoner  necessities 
and  in  proper  proportion,  the  law  of  supply  and 
demand  regulating,  gravitation  like,  the  portion 
to  be  devoted  to  each  department  of  effort.      If 


_jt 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  IO5 

misJLidgment  resulted  in  a  surfeit  in  one  direction 
there  would  be  speedy  adjustment  to  proper  ratio 
b}'  the  tendency  of  production  in  an  unfettered 
condition  to  balance.  There  could  not  be  over- 
production in  any  direction  that  would  be  more 
than  incidental,  and  amenable  to  quick  cor- 
rection. 

Where  the  people  were  priviledged  to  expand 
their  satisfactions  as  fair  dealings  would  allow, 
they  could  never  glut  themselves  with  their  ac- 
cumulations. Such  a  thing  as  the  ability  of  a 
people  to  produce  more  than  they  nvant  is  an  ab- 
surdity in  reasoning.  No  people  were  ever 
satisfied  that  they  had  as  much  as  they  wanted, 
the  trouble  is  that  labor  and  capital  have  been  so 
diverted  astray  as  to  allow  on  the  part  of  the 
masses,  neither  the  quenching  of  existing  wants 
or  the  growth  and  satisfaction  of  new  wants. 
With  all  the  great  hue  and  cry  about  over-pro- 
duction we  do  not  find  that  the  laborer  is  over- 
burdened with  caring  for  the  abundances  of  sup- 
port. While  of  the  things  he  has  helped  to 
produce,  like  lumber,  nailS;  house-building  ma- 
terials, house  furnishing,  clothing  and  food  there 
is  an  over-production,  of  these  same  things  he 
is  sadly  in  need,  and  he  would  purchase  freely  of 
them,  that  he  might  have  a  home  and  a  reason- 
able share  of  the  comforts  belonging  to  a  home, 
did  he  receive  the  amount  of  wages  which  a  fair 


Io6  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

distribution  would  allow.  The  farmer  is  not  seized 
of  a  lack  of  wants.  Were  he  not  compelled  to 
pay  a  bonus  to  the  banker  in  extra  interest  charge, 
another  to  the  railroad  in  extra  transport  charge, 
another  to  each  of  the  several  manufacturing 
combinations  for  extra  charge  upon  lumber, 
nails,  farm-tools,  and  many  articles  of  food  and 
clothing,  he  would,  through  his  savings,  become 
a  much  larger  consumer  of  lumber,  nails,  farm- 
tools,  clothing  and  of  material  to  keep  up  the 
fertility  of  his  land,  for  he  is  much  in  need  of 
them  all.  Other  instances  embracing  the  mer- 
cantile, manufacturing  and  other  independently 
operating  concerns  need  not  be  given  to  show 
that  the  mass  of  the  people  are  in  need,  many 
of  them  in  dire  need,  of  the  articles  now  in  over- 
production, and  that  lack  of  consumption  does 
not  come  from  lack  of  need  but  from  another 
cause.  A  little  less  to  unfair  profiters  and  a  little 
more  to  the  victims  of  unfair  profiters,  would  go 
a  long  way  toward  relieving  us  of  the  evil  of  over- 
production. And  a  S3'stem  of  wealth  division 
that  allowed  to  each  individual  a  reward  that  was 
even  with  his  earnings,  would  prevent  over-pro- 
duction entirely,  by  permitting  all  to  engage  in 
the  satisfaction  of  their  higher-wants,  when  their 
commoner  wants  were  quenched. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I07 


FALLACIOUS    CAUSE  FOR  HARD  TIMES. 

Here,  I  wish  to  call  attention  to  an  argument 
of  common  occurrence.  We  frequently  hear  it 
urged  that  over-production  is  the  cause  of  ''hard 
times."  The  theory  is  advanced  by  those  who 
hold,  I  presume,  that  we  cannot  develop  our  ca- 
pacities to  consume  as  fast  as  we  can  develop 
our  capacities  to  produce.  Now,  while  it  might 
be  plainly  understood  that  excess  of  earning  over 
consuming  power  might  be  the  cause  of  partial 
idleness  of  ourselves,  does  it  not  appear  odd  that 
the  power  to  over-produce,  should  be  in  and  of 
itself,  as  held,  the  cause  of  "hard  times,"  such  as 
lack,  stringenc}',  and  close  living  generally,  with 
absolute  destitution  and  want  in  many  places. 
Because  we  have  produced  too  much  of  the 
means  of  subsistence  the  masses  are  precipitated 
into  a  state  of  general  deprivation  and  inability 
to  get.  Because  there  has  been  over-production 
it  has  become  extremely  difficult  for  the  people 
in  general  to  make  both  ends  meet.  Because 
we  cannot  devour  at  once  all  we  are  enable  to 
create,  a  large  portion  of  our  population  must  be 
afflicted  with  a  condition  bordering  on  famine. 
That  is  the  theory.  But  is  it  not  queer  doctrine? 
Does  it  not  appear  altogether  more  reasonable 
to  believe  that  it  were  possible  for  us  by  our  na- 


Io8  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

tural  industry  to  create  more  than  we  could 
readily  consume,  that  the  natural  reward  would 
be  a  period  of  leisure  and  rest  in  the  enjoyment 
of  plenty?  It  does  appear  so  to  me  indeed,  and 
the  latter  would  have  to  occur,  I  am  certain,  if 
the  former  did  occur  under  the  sovereignity  of 
fair  distribution. 

The  advocates  of  the  doctrine  that  over-pro- 
duction is  the  originating  cause  of  hard  times 
fail,  I  think,  to  take  into  account  an  important 
factor  imbedded  in  the  doctrine  ot  supply  and 
demand.  If  one  of  them  were  asked  what  it 
was  that  caused  demand,  I  think  he  would  an- 
swer that  it  was  need.  He  would  say  the  peo- 
ple did  not  need  the  food,  clothing,  and  many 
sorts  of  commodities  that  exist  in  superabun- 
dance, or  they  certainly  would  not  let  them  go 
unconsumed.  And  I  think  if  he  were  asked 
again  wh}/  we  have  over-production,  he  would 
give  as  a  sole  cause  excess  of  supply  over  need. 
The  answer  would  not  harmonize  very  well  with 
the  existence  of  actual  need  almost  ever3-where, 
and  of  intense  need  in  many  places;  still,  I  think 
it  is  the  answer  that  would  be  given,  as  well  as 
vigorously  supported  by  the  champions  of  the 
doctrine. 

Their  error  consists  in  ignoring  means  as  a 
factor  in  creating  demand.  Both  need  and  means 
are  required  to  make  demand  effective.     The  one 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  I09 

enables  you  to  use  a  thing,  the  other  enables  you 
to  get  the  thing.  When  people  have  both  need 
of  certain  articles  and  means  to  procure  said 
articles,  then  does  there  exist  the  condition  which 
makes  an  effective  demand  for  those  articles. 
Neither  means  or  needs  standing  by  themselves 
will  do  the  work.  Means  alone  will  not  create 
demand.  The  exactors  have  an  extensive  sur- 
plusage of  means,  but  they  can  only  wear  so 
many  clothes,  and  can  only  eat  so  much  food,  and 
can  only  spend  so  much  for  luxur}^  and  aggran- 
dizement. Fifty  thousand  of  them  might  consume 
in  extra-extravagances  the  gains  they  might 
make  off  of  another  fifty  thousand  people,  and 
thus  prevent  over-production,  but  fifty  thousand 
exactors  cannot  consume  the  surplusage  they  can 
exact  off  of  fift}'  millions  of  people. 

Need  alone  will  not  create  demand.  The 
crying  wants  of  an  impoverished  and  enfamined 
populace  will  not  of  itself  create  a  demand  for 
wheat,  because  a  people  cannot  get  wheat  without 
means.  Both  needs  and  means  must  enter  into 
that  condition  which  is  the  condition  precedent  of 
effective  demand.  Those  fail  to  see  this,  I  think, 
who  claim  that  the  over-production  is  the  excess 
of  supply  over  need. 

Need  represent  the  capacity  of  the  people  to 
consume.  Means  represent  the  power  of  the 
people  to  purchase.       The  few  who  have  appro- 


no  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

priated  an  undue  share  of  the  people's  earnings 
cannot  themselves  use  them  up,  hence  over-pro- 
duction. The  many  who  are  in  need  of  the  com- 
modities of  over-production,  cannot  satisfy  their 
needs  for  want  of  means  of  purchase,  hence  hard 
times.  Over-production  does  not  occur  from 
excess  of  supply  over  general  need.  Over-pro- 
duction is  not  the  direct  cause  of  hard  times. 
Notice  of  the  question  in  this  relation  is  only 
called  for,  because  the  opposite  of  these  denials 
are  seriously  mantained  by  persons  of  rational 
mind. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


COMPETITION. 


Another  device,  justifiable,  resorted  to  by  men 
for  tlie  greatest  profit  to  themselves  is  the  instal- 
lation of  themselves  into  the  better  paying  voca- 
tions. People  are  inclined,  not  only  to  select  ex- 
pedients for  making  most  profitable  the  particu- 
lar vocations  in  which  they  are  engaged,  but  to 
make  selection  of  those  vocations  which  they 
can  make  most  profitable  to  themselves  upon  the 
whole.  The  rivalry  between  men  to  identify 
themselves  with  the  better  pa3')ng  vocations  is 
what  is  called  competition.  Were  competition 
entirely  free  and  fair,  ir  other  words,  did  all 
men  possess  an  equal  amount  of  liberty  and  re- 
straint in  their  endeavors  to  identify  themselves 
with  those  pursuits  which  they  conceived  the}- 
could  make  the  most  profitable  to  themselves, 
some  most  charming  results  would  follow.  What 
those  results  would  be,  as  well  as  what  would  be 
the  processes  of  their  accomplishment,  can  best 


112  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

be  learned  by  fixing  definitely  our  antecedent 
conditions,  and  observing  what  would  be  the 
conduct  and  consummations  of  men  under  them. 

The  people  of  present  society  we  may  divide 
into  two  classes:  first,  those  who,  by  reason  of 
possessing  certain  advantages  reap  continuously 
larger  than  the  average  rates  of  profit  upon  their 
undertakings;  secondly,  those  who  by  reason  of 
being  taken  the  advantage  of,  do  not  reap  larger 
than  the  average  rates  of  profit,  on  the  contrary 
may  be  reaping  no  profit  or  may  be  losing.  The 
first  class  we  call  exactors,  because  the}'  get  thdr 
higher  than  average  profits  by  exacting  an  unfair 
share  from  the  collective  earnings  of  the  whole 
people;  the  other  we  call,  in  contra-distinction, 
the  common  people  or  masses,  because  it  is  the 
great  body  of  people  who  are  made  the  sufierers 
of  exaction. 

Project  into  society  a  law,  operative  and  effi- 
cacious, that  gives  to  every  individual  absolute 
freedom  to  engage  in  any  useful  enterprise  he 
sees  fit  to,  at  the  same  time  that  it  prevents  him 
from  keeping  any  one  else  from  doing  the  same 
thing.  Provide  this  law  which  does  not  permit 
individuals  to  effectively  combine  industries  for 
sake  of  exclusive  control,  and  which  does  not 
permit  individuals  to  effectively  prevent  others 
from  coming  in  and  competing  with  them  upon 
the  grounds  they  would  monopolize.     Provide 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  II3 

this  law  which  makes  individual  or  partnership 
industrians  prefer  to  act  upon  their  own  respon- 
sibilities and  prefer  to  rely  upon  their  own  re- 
sources; and  which  causes  them  to  expect  no 
aid  from  others,  and  have  no  fears  of  interference 
from  others  beyond  what  competition  alone  oc- 
casions. Provide  thus  for  complete  self-depen- 
dence, self-reliance,  non-artificial  restraint,  equal 
priviledgedness.To  cover  all,  in  short,  provide, 
through  the  agency  of  fair  taxation,  for  that  in- 
dustrial freedom,  which  makes  possible  the  exer- 
cise of  free  and  fair  competition.  Then  we  will 
have  free  and  fair  competition,  the  workings  and 
consummations  engendered  by  which  we  may 
trace  and  define. 

Following  fair  taxation,  an  early  event,  among 
others,  would  be  a  shifting  about  of  energy  and 
capital  which  had  for  its  effect  the  reduction  of 
all  industries  to  the  same  basis  of  profitableness. 
That  is,  there  could  not  long  continue  a  set  of 
good  paying  pursuits  juxtaposited  to  a  set  of 
poor  paying  pursuits,  because  migration  would 
at  once  begin  from  the  poorer  paying  into  the 
better  paying  pursuits,  and  continue  all  in  the 
same  direction,  or  back  and  forth  as  the  occasion 
required  to  rectify  mistakes,  until  all  pursuits 
were  brought  to  a  level  of  profitableness.  This 
movement  the  people  would  be  impelled  into  by 
that    disposition  of   theirs,    admitting    of  no  ef- 


114  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

fective  exceptions,  which  constantly  urges  them 
to  cro  where  the  most  can  be  chained.  The 
movement  would  be  permitted  b}'  that  provision 
which  dissolved  all  danger  of  undue  interference 
from  those  who  before  would  have  forced  to  ruin 
and  abandonment  weak  competitors  by  tem- 
porary under-priced  sales,  bargains  for  railroad 
discrimination  and  such  other  means  as  are 
possible  while  combinations  have  sway.  Prices 
that  had  been  kept  up  by  forced  under-supply 
would  be  brought  down  to  the  average  by  the 
attraction  of  rival  producers  until  the  suppl}- 
became  normal.  Prices  that  had  been  kept  up 
by  mere  resolve  of  greed,  would  be  brought  down 
by  the  endeavors  of  ex-exactors  to  ofler  the  same 
inducements  as  rivals  if  they  would  hold  their 
trade.  Prices  that  were  unsatisfactorily  low 
would  be  brought  up  to  the  average  by  desertions 
of  those  who  had  availed  themselves  of  the  op- 
portunity to  engage  in  vocations  that  were  better 
paying. 

What  would  be  the  intermediate  movements 
of  energy  and  capital  for  the  establishment  of 
average,  we  cannot  predict  with  much  degree  of 
certainty,  because  we  cannot  now  very  well 
c^uess  how  much  industries  are  distorted  out  of 
their  natural  relationships,  or  how  much  more  the 
distortions  are  in  one  direction  than  in  another. 
Were   natural   laws    just   now  brought  into  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  II 5 

ascendency,  it  is  quite  probable  that  the  turn 
affairs  would  take,  would  be  the  occasion  of 
many  surprises  to  society.  What  we  can  predict 
with  safety  in  general  is,  that  in  the  event  of 
industrial  freedom,  migrations  of  men  and  capital 
would  immediately  start  up,  and  continue  into 
the  better  pa3'ing  pursuits  while  they  were  better 
pa3'ing,  out  of  them  again  when  others  became 
better  paying,  and  that  the  migrations  would  cease 
when  pursuits  had  all  been  brought  to  an  equality 
in  rate  of  profitableness,  only  to  begin  again  for 
re-establishment  of  equilibrium  when  non-equil- 
ibrium had  occun-ed.  We  can  safely  predict 
this,  "because  common  experience,  and  our  know- 
ledge oi  ourselves  teaches  us,  that  one  of  the 
forcible  and  fixed  functions  of  free  competition  is 
to  reduce  and  mantain  industries  to  and  at  a  level 
of  profitableness. 

REWARD    WITH   EARNINGS. 

If  there  is  any  system  which  will  guarantee  to 
every  industrian  the  even  reward  of  his  earnings 
it  is  the  system  which  throws  each  person  upon 
his  own  responsibilities,  makes  him  depend  upon 
his  own  resources  for  his  gains,  disinclines  him  to 
combine  with  others  for  sake  of  unnatural  elevation 
or  lowering  of  prices  in  the  combined  interests, 
forbids  him  to  or  prevents  him  from  forcing  others 
to  desist  in  their  competition  with  him.     Under 


Il6  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

such  a  system,  as  man  cannot  get,  one  from  the 
other,  he  is  bound  to  get  from  nature, — bound  to 
get  by  adding  to  the  collective  values  as  opposed 
to  transferring  to  his  hands  the  already  created 
values  of  others.  The  system  which  disallows 
any  encroachment  is  by  the  very  nature  of  it  the 
S3'stem  which  allows  to  each  a  rew^ard  equivalent 
to  his  earnings,  and  thereby  discovers  to  each,  as 
has  been  before  explained,  what  is  his  share  of 
earnings. 

The  rates  of  reward  which  free  competition 
would  disburse,  are  not,  as  some  might  suppose, 
exact  sameness  of  pecuniar}'  return  upon  the  unit 
for  all  similarly  applied  earnings  or  for  all  capital 
engaged,  for  free  competition  takes  notice  of  and 
allows  for  differences  of  ability  and  of  capital  ad- 
justment, and  for  differences  in  riskiness,  healthi- 
ness, agreeableness  and  permanenc}'  of  pursuits. 
It  settles  wdth  all  parties  according  to  real  worths 
expended,  as  also  it  decides  what  are  the  real 
/•worths.  The  extra  energetic  and  capable  com- 
mand their  real  worth  while  the  less  gifted  are 
not  denied  their  full  share.  Allowances  at  all 
times  are  to  be  made  for  incidental  misjudgments 
of  men  and  incidental  irregularities  of  nature, 
which,  while  they  occur,  are  nothing  compared  to 
what  unfair  distribution  causes,  at  the  same  time 
that  the  hardships  they  entail  are  minimumized 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I  I  7 

by  the  tendency   of   free   conditions   to  promote 
quick  corrections. 

Profitableness  of  vocations  being  equalized,  all 
rewards  of  course  would  be  proportioned  to  value 
or  amount  of  expenditure.  As  it  is  the  dis- 
position of  nature  to  repay  man's  expenditure 
upon  her  toitli  wterest,  the  nahwal  effect  of  pro- 
portional reward  is  to  enrich  all  people  in  common. 
Enrichment  aside  of  impoverishment  is  a  siLre 
sign  of  misgovernment. 

SUPPLY    AND    DEMAND. 

The  work  of  equalizing  the  profitableness  of 
pursuits  (and  reward  with  earnings)  is  inseparably 
joined  also  to  the  work  of  equalizing  supply  with 
demand.  This  is  occasioned  by  the  impossibility 
of  consummating  the  one  event  without  consum- 
mating also  the  other.  Why,  we  may  proceed 
to  show. 

The  cost  of  creating  an  over-supply  is  not  pro- 
portionatel}^  less  than  the  cost  of  creating  an 
even  or  an  under-supply,  while  an  unconsumed 
excess  is  the  occasion  of  loss,  sometimes  of 
enough  loss  to  wipe  out  all  profits  or  to  bring 
one  into  deticiency.  Again,  a  great  share  of 
the  things  furnished  for  the  consumption  of  man 
are  of  such  a  perishable  nature  that  if  not  con- 
sumed as  fast  as  they  are   prepared   they  entail 


Il8  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

absolute  loss  upon  the  producer  to  the  extent  of 
the  cost  of  their  production.  Again,  less  perish- 
ing and  long  lasting  articles  need  to  be  disposed 
of  in  due  season  that  capital  may  not  be  bound  up 
unutilizable  and  unremunerative,  and  that  funds 
may  not  be  wanting  for  the  furnishing  of  a  new 
season's  supply.     Again,  over-supply    wants  to 

be  avoided  because  the  advance  discovery  of 
over-supply  impels  to  a  lowering  of  prices  upon 
that  portion  of  products  disposed  of,  which  adds 
to  the  loss  occasioned  by  there  being  an  excess 
which  is  never  disposed  of.  For  instance,  a  pre- 
ponderance of  articles  of  any  given  kind  being 
prepared,  the  sluggishness  of  trade  soon  opens 
the  eyes  of  owners  to  the  fact  of  over-supply  in 
their  particular  line.  The  too  numerous  gar- 
deners or  shoe  manufacturers  foresee  by  the  way 
patronage  begins,  that  it  will  not  be  sufficiently 
active  to  take  up  commodities  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  obviate  loss  from  deterioration  and  decay, 
to  provide  funds  to  meet  current  bills,  and 
to  suppl}'  means  to  prosecute  vigorously  the 
fashioning  of  supplies  for  the  3'ear  to  come.  The 
over-crowded  grocers  discover  from  the  slug- 
gishness of  trade  that  the  sale  and  replenishment 
of  goods  is  going  on  twice  as  slow  as  it  should  to 
3'ield  at  current  prices,  the  customary  profit.  As 
soon  as  those  caught  in  over-supply  discover  their 
situations,  they   know  what    they   must  expect 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  II9 

and  what  they  must  do.  Any  one  of  them  knows 
that  if  he  should  attempt  to  maintain  standard 
prices  under  such  a  situation,  he  would  be  punished 
for  his  folly  by  being  allowed  to  permanently 
retain  his  wares  and  to  suffer  greater  loss  than  if 
he  sold  at  a  discount.  But  no  one  of  sane  mind 
attempts  such  a  suicidal  course.  What  each  does 
do  when  he  is  caught  in  such  a  situation  is  to 
adopt  the  course  of  avoiding  the  greatest  loss  by 
enduring:  the  least  loss.  He  offers  inducements 
to  stimulate  patronage  and  reduce  to  a  minimum, 
waste  and  non-purchasers ;  also  to  vie  with  others 
whom  he  knows  are  controlled  by  the  same 
motives  as  he. 

But  the  efforts  to  minimumize  loss,  when 
caught  in  the  predicament  of  oyer-supply,  is  not 
a  profitable  business,  therefore  the  people  labor 
not  to  be  caught  in  such  predicament,  on  the 
contrary,  labor  to  keep  supply  even  with  de- 
mand. 

We  see  then  that  over-done  pursuits  are  the 
poor  paying  pursuits  ;  that  over-supply  and  poor 
pay  go  together.  Therefore,  when  people 
leave  poor  paying  pursuits  because  they  are 
poor  paying,  they  leave  them  just  as  much  be- 
cause they  are  over-supplying,  and  when  they 
leave  over-supplying  pursuits  they  render  them 
better  paying  by  withdrawing  agencies  of  sup- 
ply and  adding  to  the  agencies  of  demand,  and 


r20  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

when  they  have  withdrawn  until  the  profitable- 
ness of  the  pursuits  they  have  left  are  rendered 
equal  to  the  average,  they  have  pursued  a  course 
which  has  reduced  the  supply  of  the  fruits  in  the 
discarded  vocations  to  a  harmony  with  a  de- 
mand for  them. 

These  several  harmonies  caused  to  take  place 
are  not  the  direct  objects  aimed  at  by  those  who 
bring  them  about.  They  are  the  results  of  the 
forcible  promptings  of  every  individual  to  serve 
himself  best,  combined  with  the  provision  which 
forbids  any  one  to  interfere  with  another  in  his 
fair  and  rightful  attempt  to  carry  his  promptings 
into  actions.  They  are  the  result  of  a  desire  of 
each  to  attain  to  the  highest  standard,  combined 
with  the  impossibility  of  all  attaining  to  the 
highest  without  each  getting  equally  high. 
They  are  the  results  of  the  calculations  men 
form  to  avoid  making  expenditures  in  one  di- 
rection that  will  be  less  remunerative  than  ex- 
penditures in  another  direction,  which  calcula- 
tions embrace  considerations  referred  to  above, 
relating  to  unsales,  total  sales,  slow  sales,  quick 
sales,  dangers  arising  from  over-supply  and 
other  mis- attempts.  Men  prompted  by  their 
propensities  and  guided  by  self-saving  conside- 
rations, do  what  ends  in  balancing  rate  of  profit 
with  rate  of  profit,  reward  with  earnings  and 
supply  with  demand.     When  balance  has  been 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTIOK.  ^21 

established,  people  have  no  further  to  seek,  with 
respect  to  these  devices,  for  the  improvement 
of  themselves.  Each  is  doing  the  best  it  is  pos- 
sible for  him  to  do,  so  far  as  concerns  what  is  to 
be  gained  through  industrial  harmony,  and  he 
must  be  and  is  content  to  rest  satisfied  on  that 
score  while  perfected  adjustments  continue. 

I  desire  now  to  call  attention  to  some  other 
facts  pertaining  to  these  harmonies. 

The  harmonies  caused  to  take  place,  are,  in 
the  first  place,  harmonies  of  earnings.  The  dis- 
pensing of  profits,  rewards  and  supplies  in  their 
harmonious  relationships  refer  to  the  distribution 
of  earnings  in  their  proper  proportions.  It  all 
has  to  do  with  earnings. 

All  earnings  are  utilized,  manifesting  that 
freemen  appreciate  what  is  the  true  object  of 
endeavor  and  getting. 

People  have  their  leading  wants  satisfied. 
That  is  as  much  as  is  conveyed  in  the  idea  of 
harmony  of  supply  and  demand.  It  is  question- 
able whether  society  will  ever  be  able  to  satisfy 
in  full  the  demands  it  will  ever  and  anon  be 
making  against  itself.  No  such  possibility  is 
now  observable.  Demand  is  equal  to  supply 
when  commodities  prepared  for  consumption  or 
utilization  can  be  parted  with  ataveragely  remu- 
nerative rates  within  such  a  period  after  they  are 
prepared  as  to  prevent  perishment   of  goods. 


122  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

need  of  funds  for  continuous  or  reasonable  ope- 
ration, or  there  being  in  the  way  undisposed 
stock  when  the  time  is  past  due  for  the  way  to 
be  cleared  and  ready  for  the  admission  of  new 
supply.  In  other  words  equal  demand  is  due 
and  reasonable  exhaustion,  in  order  and  con- 
tinuously, of  supplies  of  the  people  in  satisfaction  of 
their  leading  wants.  That  is  as  much  as  we  can 
say  of  demand  in  view  of  the  people's  extraordinary 
power  of  amplification  of  needs. 

Seasonable  or  normal  consumption  of  supplies 
is  due  to  these  tw^o  circumstances: 

I  St.  The  carrying  of  each  one's  efforts  and 
capital  hither  and  thither,  or  the  retention  of  them 
in  place,  in  free  response  to  the  desii^e  to  comply 
with  demand. 

2d.  The  making  of  each  one's  earnings  the 
standard  by  which  is  measured  his  gettings  and 
givings. 

In  as  much  as  the  people  at  best  are  capable  of 
only  partially  supplying  their  needs,  there  is  no 
possibilit}'  of  any  industry  naturally  existing 
w^hich  produced  something  the  people  did  not 
want.  The  competition  to  get  into  good  pa3'ing 
businesses  would  kill  them  all  off,and  leave  not  an 
item  of  supply  to  come  forth  that  did  not,  under 
all  ordinar}^  circumstances,  have  an  appropriate 
niche  to  fill.     Under  such  conditions  there  could 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  1 23 

not  be  anything  but  a  round  and  round  of  industry 
to  try  to  keep  up  with  demand. 

As  competition  rewards  according  to  earnings 
there  is  no  way  to  get  suppHes  distributed  to  their 
appropriate  places  except  to  govern  the  amount 
given  to  each  by  the  amount  he  has  earned.  You 
then  exhaust  suppl}-,  for  if  persons  are  rewarded 
in  full  of  amount  earned  it  takes  all  earnings  to 
reward  them. 

What  is  distributed  back  to  each  governs  the 
amount  each  can  bring  foward  again,  the  kind 
needed  being  regulated  as  before  by  the  effort  to 
produce  for  best  pay.  Again  is  the  value  taken 
back  by  each  governed  by  the  amount  each  has 
brought  forward  and  the  supply  exhausted  in 
making  full  compensation. 

The  competition  to  secure  greatest  profit 
compels  each  individual  or  corporate  industrian  to 
apportion  and  assign  his  energies  and  capital  as 
public  wants  dictate.  The  expense  of  keeping  up 
this  energy  and  capital  thus  arranged  calls  for 
the  amount  of  values  they  contribute. 

The  subject  becomes  narrowed  down  to  one 
of  compatibility  of  needs  with  means  in  the  indi- 
vidual. Each  industrian  has  become  so  enjrafred 
that  he  needs  all  his  means  will  get  him,  yet  has 
no  stern  needs  that  his  means  will  not  supply. 
Each  possesses  needs  and  means  to  match,  can 
produce  in  harmon}-  with  his  needs  and  consume 


124  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

as  much  as  he  produces,  thus  keeping  the  field  of 
his  wants  filling  up  and  emptying  by  a  constant 
process.  This  is  harmony  as  respects  each  unit 
of  societ3\  The  situation  of  the  units  of  society 
images  the  situation  of  society  as  a  whole. 

For  the  further  illustration  of  this  subject,  let 
us  make  use  of  an  individual  whom  we  will  name 
John.  Let  us  suppose  John  to  engage  with  a 
capital  of  $175.00  in  the  beginning  of  the  3'ear 
1880. 

John,  with  the  aid  of  $175.00  earns  $600.00  in 

1880.  He  uses  $400.00  and  saves  $200.00  for 
1881. 

John,  with  the  aid  of  $200.00  earns  $650.00  in 

1881.  He  uses  $425.00  and  saves  $225.00  for 
1882. 

John,  with  the  aid  of  $225.00  earns  $700.00  in 

1882.  He  uses  $450.00  and  saves  $250.00  for 
1883. 

John  goes  on  thus,  producing  within  the  bounds 
of  his  earnings,  as  likewise  he  consumes  within 
the  same  bounds.  We  observe  that  John  need 
let  no  value  that  was  desio:ned  for  him  q-q  unused 
for  want  of  purchasing  capacity.  Nor  is  there 
any  danger  of  him  and  those  engaged  in  the  like 
business  producing  out  of  all  proportion  to  the 
demands  for  their  wares,  as  they  might  do  in  any 
season  after  their  capital  was  suddenly  doubled  by 
the  chance  to  extort  unfair  prices.     Kept  within 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 25 

wholesome  bounds  and  aided  as  they  are  by  the 
proper  proportion  of  means  they  will  exercise  the 
best  possible  judgment  and  consistenc}^  in  catering 
to  public  demands. 

Owing  to  the  over-responsiveness  of  nature,  we 
are  made  to  observe  that  John  grows  richer  3ear 
after  year.  Owning  to  his  desire  to  live  better  at 
the  present  and  to  improve  his  future  condition 
also,  we  are  led  to  see  that  he  divides  his  increase 
of  wealth  between  himself  and  his  capital.  As 
he  grows  richer  he  will  dispense  with  the  wearing 
of  shoddy  goods,  and  the  eating  of  adulterated 
foods.  He  will  demand  good  goods  as  well  as 
increased  varieties.  As  John  does,  so  does  all  his 
fellow  beings.  John  is  only  an  image  of  the 
rest,  big  and  little.  They  demand  good  goods  of 
him  just  as  much  as  he  demands  good  goods  of 
them.  But  John  is  equal  to  the  occasion.  He 
can  furnish  them  what  the}'  want  for  he  has  the 
means  of  supplying  himself  with  the  facilities,  like 
improved  stocks  of  raw  material,  improved  buil- 
dings, and  everything  else  needed  to  supply  in 
compliance  with  the  improved  demand.  As  can 
John  do,  so  can  every  other  industrian  in  society 
do.     As  does  all  industrians  so  does  socict}'. 

We  see,  then,  that  free  competition  is  not  only 
a  harmonizer  of  earnings,  but  an  employer  ot 
harmonized  earnings  for  the  maintainance  of 
harmony.  It  gives  each  industrian  no  more  than 


126  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

is  compatible  with  his  needs  as  a  producer  and 
consumer,  at  the  same  time  that  it  supplies  him 
with  a  sufficiency.  It  provides  for  balance  and 
consistency  throughout  by  check  and  enable- 
ment of  each  person  within  and  up  to  the  possi- 
bilities his  earnings  confer.  It  makes  harmony 
and  the  getting  of  harmony  mutually  respon- 
sive and  promotive. 

O  VER-PRODUCTION. 

I  have  explained  that,  left  entirely  free  to 
choose  how  they  will  expend  their  energies  and 
their  capital,  people  contain  within  themselves 
the  forces  for  so  adjusting  their  affairs  as  to 
make  all  things  harmonize.  I  have  shown,  also, 
that  in  the  absence  of  industrial  freedom  there 
can  be  nothing  but  the  most  aggravated  dishar- 
monies, because  that  absence  promotes  the  lift- 
ing into  power  and  control  those  who  will  do  all 
they  can  to  create  in  their  favor  disharmonies. 
And  I  have  shown  that,  without  free  competi- 
tion, earnings  could  not  be  harmoniously  dis- 
posed, though  man  strived  to  his  utmost  for  such 
a  consummation,  owing  to  his  powerlessness  to 
decide  in  advance,  whenever  a  reward  is  to  be 
disbursed,  what  should  be  the  size  of  the  reward. 
I  may  now  proceed  to  notice  in  juxtaposition 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I  2  7 

what  are  some  of  the  dispensations  and  engage- 
ments of  anti-free  conditions. 

The  more  visible  effects  of  unfair  distribution, 
such  as  the  self-denial  imposed  upon  those  who 
must  part  with  portions  of  their  earnings  with- 
out equivalent,  I  shall  not  make  the  subject  of 
attention  here,  but  shall  proceed  at  once  to  ex- 
amine into  the  subject  of  over-production. 

Over-production  is  the  champion  representa- 
tive of  unfair  distribution,  and  becomes  of  itself 
an  occasion  and  instrumentality  of  a  train  of  mis- 
eries worse  in  character  than  those  which  unfair 
distribution  immediately  gives  rise  to. 

Over-production  is  over-supply,  the  excess  of 
supply  over  demand,  occurring  from  the  intro- 
duction into  societ}'  of  devices  for  the  appropria- 
tion of  earnings  without  giving  value  for  them. 
The  fundamental  devices  for  this  work  are  unfair 
taxation  and  unfair  exchange.  Those  who  do  not 
pay  their  full  share  of  tax  save  more  than  their 
proportionate  share  of  earnings,  or  make  a  gain 
by  getting  service  for  less  than  it  is  worth. 
Those  who  exchange  unfairly  make  a  gain,  con- 
sisting of  savings  of  their  own  earnings,  or  of 
overdue  proportions  gotten  from  those  with 
whom  they  exchange.  Allow  one  class,  and  a 
small  one,  as  it  always  is,  to  gain  continuously 
from  all  the  rest  in  their  dispensations  and  deal- 
ings with  all  the  rest,  and  you  generate  a  morbid 


128  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

quantity  which  the  class  getting  it  cannot  use 
either  for  ordinary  personal  consumption  or  pro- 
fitably as  capital,  and  which  the  class  from 
whom  it  was  taken  cannot  use  in  any  natural 
wa}^,  because  it  is  no  longer  theirs  to  use.  It 
stands  out  as  an  independent  quantity  to  be  used 
for  some  other  purpose  than  the  natural  opera- 
tions of  production  and  consumption.  It  is 
a  gain  in  the  ownership  of  those  who  have  ex- 
acted it,  but  there  is  nothing  like  a  consideration 
or  value  received  for  it  in  the  hands  of  those 
from  whom  it  was  gained.  It  is  a  portion  in 
stake  over  and  above  what  could  be  paid  down 
for  from  current  earnings  if  those  from  whom  it 
was  taken  were  compelled  to  purchase  it  at  once. 
Where  and  in  what  forms  does  this  gain  ex- 
ist.^ There  is  in  possession  of  the  exactors,  when 
a  season's  operations  have  been  concluded,  first, 
retained  on  hand  of  their  own  make,  products 
which  would  not  have  been  retained  had  they 
let  their  wares  go  at  earned  valuations;  secondly, 
in  possession  of  them  of  the  people's  make,  pro- 
ducts which  they  would  not  have  got  had  they 
taken  the  people's  wares  at  earned  valuations; 
thirdly,  cash  and  debt  evidences  surrendered  to 
bridge  over  the  deficit  the  hard  terms  of  the  ex- 
actors created  in  the  people's  expense  and  profit 
account.  Each  season  intensifies  matters  on  both 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 29 

sides — i^ives  the  exactors  more  surplus,   creates 
on  the  side  of  the  masses  greater  vacuity. 

If  the  exactors  made  way  with  their  gains 
they  could  prevent  over-production,  but  they 
cannot  do  this  in  any  ordinary  way  Increased 
expenditure  for  food,  clothing  and  luxuries  by 
a  limited  number  of  exactors  will  not  suffice  to 
make  way  with  the  gains  that  can  be  absorbed 
from  the  balance  of  the  nation.  They  might 
by  actually  destroying  their  gains,  prevent  ex- 
cessive accumulation,  and  keep  the  masses  con- 
tinuously engaged  at  furnishing  new  supply. 
But  somethinq;  like  this  would  have  to  be  done 
They  cannot  use  it  as  capital.  If  in  one  year 
they  parted  not  with  all  they  produced  what 
sort  of  incentive  is  there  for  increasino-  the 
production  of  another  year? 

They  do  increase  their  capitalistic  invest- 
ments however.  Capital  abhors  idleness  and 
so  finds  investment.  Railroads  increase  their 
mileage.  Factories  enlarge  their  plants.  Spec- 
ulators engage  in  all  sorts  of  false  enterprises, 
but  it  is  only  a  wild  hunt  for  gains — gains  standing 
opposed  to  vacuity — to  find  a  way  to  make  them- 
selves remunerative.  How  well  such  invest- 
ments succeed  is  answered  by  telling  how  well 
over-investments  succeed. 

Considered  with  reference  to  legitimate  use  or 
employment   we  can   truly   say  that   oa/p/s  can 


130  UNFAIR   DISTRIBUTION. 

neither  be  enjoyed  or  employed  by  those  who  get 
them.  Their  only  function  is  to  develop  over- 
extravagance,  over-production  and  over-invest- 
ment as  opposed  to  over-indigence,  under-con- 
sumption,  and  under-investment. 

Another  point  or  two  about  over-productiOn. 
If  we  consider  the  gains  of  exactors  as  so  much 
taken  from  the  peoples'  earnings,  we  can  consider 
what  the  people  retain  as  so  much  saved  out  of 
their  earnings.  That  being  so  we  can  state  that 
to  supply  themselves  with  the  necessaries  of  life 
the  people  must  produce  an  excess.  Where 
persons  have  had  to  contract  their  consumption  of 
essentials  on  account  of  the  severity  of  exaction, 
the  excess  stands  opposed  to  states  of  real  depri- 
vation, or  lack  of  necessaries.  This  excess  would 
have  been,  in  the  absence  of  exaction,  consumed. 
In  the  case  of  persons  who  have  saved  enough  to 
supply  themselves  with  necessaries,  fheir  excess 
is  the  product  of  exertion  that  would  have  been 
devoted  to  the  satisfaction  of  higher  wants.  Thus 
it  is  seen  that  over-production  represents  a  double 
portion,  a  portion  corresponding  to  essential  needs 
and  a  portion  in  excess  of  essential  needs,  and 
which  would  never  have  been  but  for  exaction. 

Over-production  consists  mainly  of  staple  com- 
modities. Why  }  Exaction  is  applied  in  the 
direction  of  exigency  of  demand.  The  climaxic 
desideratum    of    productive    efforts    is    a    quick 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  I3I 


market.  If  immediate  or  seasonable  disposal 
cannot  be  had  the  nearest  approach  to  it  is 
sought.  Though  the  commodities  of  over-pro- 
duction are  not  seasonably  disposable,  that  form 
in  which  they  find  quickest  disposal  is  staples,  or 
things  adapted  to  supply  peoples'  commoner 
wants.  This  arises  from  two  facts;  first,  the  com- 
modities are  destined  to  be  consumed  by  the 
people;  secondl}",  exaction,  through  impairment  of 
the  purchase  power,  confines  people  to  the  con- 
sumption of  necessities.  It  may  appear  like  an 
anomalous  expression,  the  saying  that  what  the 
people  are  prevented  from  immediately  pur- 
chasing they  are  destined  to  purchase  and  con- 
sume in  the  end,  but  paradoxical  as  it  may  seem, 
it  is  true,  as  will  be  fully  explained,  and  as  has 
been  indicated  in  stating  the  requisition  precedent 
of  the  employers  of  Notseen  when  they  had 
brought  on  over-production.  A  proportionate 
share  of  the  articles  of  over-production  consists  of 
things  calculated  to  satisfy  the  higher  wants  of 
man,  intellectual  and  pleasurable  on  the  part  of 
those  who  can  afibrd  them,  owing  to  equalizing 
tendencies.  But  as  the  bulk  of  the  population 
are  reduced  to  the  condition  of  consumers  of 
essentials  only,  and  as  the  over-production  is 
destined  mainly  for  their  consumption,  it  is  evolved 
by  the  law  of  trade  mainl}'  into  the  form  of 
staples. 


132  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


RESTRICTED    COMPETITION. 

We  often  hear  the  advocates  of  exaction  dis- 
coursing upon  the  evils  of  competition,  the  ruin 
it  causes,  and  the  necessit}'  of  pools  and  combin- 
ations to  avoid  it.  The  kind  of  competition  the}' 
refer  to  is  the  competition  born  of  combination 
and  pools,  and  exaction  generally.  It  is  a  com- 
petition of  sellers.  It  is  the  competition  of  over- 
investors  to  make  three  industries  live,  when 
two  would  have  fattened  had  the  capital  of  the 
third  been  left  with  the  under-investors  to 
develop  trade  to  match.  It  is  the  competition 
of  surpluses  to  find  sales  among  a  class  who  have 
been  robbed  of  their  means  of  purchase.  It  is  the 
competition  of  money  to  find  borrowers,  when 
the  people  have  discovered  that  the  savings  of 
outlay  cannot  be  made  to  equal  outlay.  It  is 
the  competition  of  homesteads  to  get  sales  to 
save  the  owners  from  entire  wreck.  It  is  the 
competition  of  laborers  to  sell  services  when  the 
high-profit  industries  are  overdone  and  the  com- 
mon industries  have  not  the  means  or  the  en- 
courag^ement  to  hire. 

This  competition  is  at  its  climax  when  over- 
production is  at  its  climax — when  surpluses  are 
doing  their  best  to  unload  themselves  upon  the 
people  in  exchange  for  the   people's   preposses- 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  1 33 

sions  or  capital.  It  is  attended  with  low  prices, 
failures,  foreclosures,  riots  and  all  sorts  of  trou- 
bles— at  their  worst,  also,  when  over-production 
is  at  its  worst — which  are  born  of  the  competi- 
tion to  sell  without  there  being  a  corresponding 
lot  of  equally  anxious  bu3'ers.  It  is,  indeed,  the 
tumult  of  capital,  frenzied  at  being  forbidden  to 
profit  more,  and  struggling  to  adjust  itself  to 
some  basis  of  profit.  Such  competition  is  ruin- 
ous and  retrogressive.  By  way  of  paralyzing 
our  efforts,  undermining  our  resources,  and  cre- 
ating losses  and  setbacks  generally,  it  affords 
abundant  reasons  for  disparagement  of  competi- 
tion so  long  as  restricted  competition  is  made  the 
subject  of  disparagement. 

Against  the  results  of  free  competition  no 
complaint  can  be  urged.  The  first  impulse  is  to 
object  that  competition  will  reduce  all  businesses 
to  a  low  grade  rate  of  profitableness.  But,  to 
repi}',  the  best  and  the  worst  that  free  competi- 
tion can  do  is  to  make  all  accept  the  same  rate 
of  profit.  If  labor  and  capital  are  continuously 
engaged,  and  at  greatest  advantage,  what  can 
there  be  but  an  increase  of  wealth  out  of  all  pro- 
portion to  the  present  standards  of  increase;  and 
who  must  get  this  wealth,  and  who  must  accept 
low  profits.'' 

Free  competition,  I  am  convinced,  would 
double  or  treble  the  national   increase  of  wealth. 


134  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

because  all  the  forces  of  wealth-making  would 
be  constantly  and  most  advantageously  em- 
plo3-ed. 

It  would  enrich  all  mankind,  because  such  ac- 
celerated wealth-increase,  fairly  distributed,  could 
not  do  otherwise. 

It  would  drive  indigence  from  every  door,  be- 
cause that  could  not  but  occur  where  the  poor- 
est had  steady  emplo3'nient  at  more  remu- 
nerative rates  than  now. 

It  would  do  away  with  slothful  habits,  because 
the  opportunity  to  handsomely  profit  could  not 
be  withstood. 

Speculation  would  yield  to  honest  industry, 
because  capital  seeks  honest  investment  first, 
speculation  afterward. 

Investments  would  be  in  improvements  rather 
than  extensions,  because  the  natural  outlet  of 
excess  wealth  is  in  betterments  of  quarters  and 
surroundings. 

Corners  in  commodities  would  become  un- 
known, because  everybody  could  compete  and 
prevent  them. 

Adulterations  would  cease,  because  people 
could  afford  to  indulge  in  the  genuine. 

Lastly,  "  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest 
number  "  would  have  to  succumb  to  the  suprem- 
acy of  a  superior  motto  :  "  The  great  good  of 
all." 


CHAPTER  V. 


MONOPOLY. 


An  unjnstltiable  device  of  man  for  the  profit  of 
himself  is  the  monopoly  of  industries. 

The  monopoly  of  an  industry  is  such  control 
over  it  as  afiects  tlie  exclusion  of  rivals.  The 
purpose  of  monopoly  is  to  enable  those  in  control 
to  dictate  terms  of  self-enrichment,  cliiciiy  by 
maximumizing  prices  charged  and  minimum- 
izing  prices  paid.  In  this  chapter  I  shall  confine 
myself  to  some  of  the  remoter  effects  of  monopoly 
considered  as  an  instrumentality  in  and  of  itself. 

IRRESISTIBLE    DIVESTMENT    OF    PROPERTIES 
AND    PRIVELEGES. 

Unfair  distribution  through  the  instrumentality 
of  monopoly  may  be  called  exaction  in  exchange. 
It  is  a  method  of  commerce  in  which  one  class  is 
compelled  to  deal  with  another  class  and  to  give 
the  other  class  all  the  advantages  there  is  in  the 
bargain.     The  first  result  is  gains,  surplus,  over- 


136  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

production.  The  second  result  is  rapid  and  total 
divestment  of  the  one  class  for  the  aggrandizement 
of  the  other. 

The  divestment  is  carried  on  through  the  pro- 
cess of  forcing  the  people  to  redeem  the  gains  or 
commodities  of  over-production,  and  to  substitute 
for  them  their  homes,  their  fixed  possessions,  and 
added  services — to  buy  back  lost  earnings  and  to 
pay  for  them  with  that  which  is  back  of  current 
earnings,  and  which  we  may  call  for  short  "pre- 
possessions." The  end  can  be  but  total  impov- 
erishment for  the  masses  who  are  thus  imposed 
upon.  How  else  can  it  result?  How  is  it  possible 
for  the  masses  to  deal  with  the  exactors  and  con- 
tinuously give  them  the  advantage  without  falling- 
back  upon  their  prepossessions  time  and  again 
until  everything  is  lost,  to  find  something  to  settle 
differences  with. 

It  may  be  said  that  there  is  no  such  a  thing  as 
a  deal  between  the  exactors  and  the  masses  in 
the  sense  of  a  commerce  between  two  parties. 
There  is  nevertheless.  The  commerce  of  any 
individual  is  his  exchange,  either  of  service  or 
commodity,  with  the. balance  of  the  world.  He 
buys,  sells,  exchanges  with  those  around  him;  he 
is  their  customer,  they  are  his.  Between  the 
exactors  and  the  masses  or  people  as  contradistin- 
guished from  them,  those  transactions  which 
severally   transpire,   having  the  exactors  on  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  '137 

one  side,  the  people  on  the  other,  compose  a 
distinct  and  separate  body  of  transactions  as 
between  the  two.  Although  visibly  interwoven 
and  crossed  by  the  transactions  between  the 
members  of  the  exactors  themselves  and  those 
between  the  members  of  the  masses  themselves, 
those  which  occur  between  the  masses  and  the 
exactors  constitute  a  distinct  line  of  tran 
sactions,  just  as  distinct  as  those  which  occur  be- 
tween one  man  and  another  or  between  one  nation 
and  another. 

Now  let  us  illustrate  in  a  wa}'  that  a  child  can 
understand.  We  will  suppose  that  two  men  get 
and  remain  together  for  a  period  of  time,  each 
man  having  a  horse  worth  $100.00  and  one  of 
the  men  having  $100.00  in  cash  besides.  We 
will  suppose  further  that  under  a  stress  of  cir- 
cumstances, not  material  to  be  specified  in  kind 
for  this  illustration,  the  men  trade  horses  once  a 
day  and  the  man  with  $100.00  cash  gives  always 
$10.00  to  boot.  Will  he  not  upon  the  tenth 
trade  have  lost  all  his  money  .^  Then  if  they 
continue  trading  in  the  same  one-sided  way,  will 
not  the  man  that  has  lost  his  money  indebt  him- 
self to  the  other  at  the  rate  of  $10.00  per  day,  and 
will  he  not  on  the  tenth  day  have  lost  his  horse .^ 
lie  will  most  assuredly,  and  just  as  assuredly  will 
the   masses   lose  all   of    their  properties  through 


138  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

having  to  deal  with  the  exactors  in  the  same  one- 
sided way. 

At  first  blush   it   might  be  supposed    that  the 

way  for  the  masses  to  make  up  for  the  exactions 

of  the  monopolists  is  to  work  hard  and  produce 

plenty  to  sell.     Under  a  system   of  unfair  trade 

such  attempt  onl}-  makes  it  worse  for  the  people. 

In  the  illustration  of  Notseen  (page  18),  we  saw 

that  every  day  the  emplo3'es  labored  after  their 

wages  were  cut  down,  added   to  the  size  of  the 

portion    that    current    wages    would    not    bu}*. 

Every  day  of   labor  produced  the  portion  which 

answered  as  wages  and   left  a  percentage    to  go 

into  surplus.     That  is  the  situation  between  the 

masses  and  the  exactors.     The  exactors  conduct 

certain   affairs   of    industr}^  on  the   one   side,  the 

masses   on   the   other.     In  the  dealings  between 

them  the  exactors  dictate  the  terms  both  wa3's, 

they  say  what   they  charge   and   they  say  what 

they    pay.       The    consequence    is    a    difference 

always  in  their  favor.     The  more  the  masses  try 

to  work   and   earn  to   overcome    this  difference 

the  more  must  they  deal  with  the  exactors  and 

therefore  the  larger  and  faster  do  the}'  make  this 

difference  grow.    -  Undertaking  to  reduce  it  b}' 

extra  energy  in  production  or  extra  time  in  service 

is  like  expecting  that  perseverence  in  the  attempt 

will  at  length  enable  a  person  to  balance  weekl}' 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 39 

expenditures  of  $10.00  with  weekly  receipts  of 
$8.00. 

There  is  no  doubt  a  vague  impression  among 
folks  who  have  not  given  the  subject  much  thought 
that  the  exactors  have  some  wa}'  of  disposing  of 
gained  surpluses  within  themselves;  that  it  is  not 
made  to  reflect  to  the  disadvantage  of  those  from 
whom  it  is  taken  after  it  has  left  the  latter's  hands; 
that  the  deprivation  caused  by  the  dispossessment 
is  the  total  and  ultimate  of  the  injur}'  entailed 
upon  the  masses  on  account  of  the  exaction.  In 
short  that  there  can  be  such  a  thing  as  submitting 
to  monopolistic  exaction  and  holding  on  to  ones 
property  at  the  same  time. 

But  the  two  cannot  go  together.  As  the 
revenue  of  gains  stands  opposed  to  a  correspon- 
ding blank  on  the  people's  side,  it  makes  it  pos- 
sible for  exactors  to  invest  in  the  people's  pre- 
possessions. As  they  think  it  politic  to  do  so, 
it  is  done.  The  same  cause  which  makes  it 
politic  and  possible  for  them  to  invest  in  peoples' 
prepossessions  makes  it,  as  we  shall  show,  politic 
and  necessary  for  the  people  to  part  with  their 
prepossessions.  It  is  a  mathematical  impossibil- 
ity for  one  class  to  deal  with  another  and  contin- 
uously give  that  other  the  advantage  without  reg- 
ularly and  periodically  yielding  up, to  balance  the 
advantage,  portion  by  portion,  of  prepossessions. 
It  does  not  appear  to  me  that  this  needs  more 


140  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

than  to  be  stated  to  be  seen,  yet  it  needs  to  be 
stated  that  those  who  have  never  looked  into 
the  matter  may  be  apprised  of  an  inevitable 
fact  and  danger. 

It  is  argued  by  some  that  a  brisk  foreign  trade 
would  prevent  or  exhaust  over-production.  --  It 
is  hard  for  me  to  see,  in  the  first  place,  how 
there  could  be  any  brisk  foreign  market  for  us 
with  all  other  countries  in  the  same  dosf-in- 
the-manger  condition  as  ours — the  rich  surfeited, 
the  masses  robbed  of  their  means  to  buy.  In 
the  second  place,  I  cannot  see  how  the  ex- 
•change  of  our  over-productions  for  other  coun- 
tries' over-productions  would  better  enable  the 
masses  to  consume  them.  The  natural  product- 
for-product  trade  has  been  destroyed  in  devel- 
oping the  gain,  and  the  gain  can  be  exhausted 
only  by  exchanging  itself  for  something  else 
than  products. 

It  is  readily  seen  how  gains  are  resolvable  In- 
to and  absorb  properties,  but  not  so  readily  seen 
how  they  resolve  into  and  absorb  services.  I 
can  best  explain  the  matter  by  reference  to 
the  illustration-  of  Notseen.  There,  after  the 
cut  in  wages,  the  surplus  accumulated  at  the 
rate  of  $237.50  worth  per  day,  on  account  of 
the  employes  receiving  but  five  days'  earnings 
for  six  days'  work.  The  employing  proprietors 
could   have   resolved   this   surplus,   had  it   been 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I4I 

their  design  to  prevent  accumulation,  by  taking 
the  employes  away  from  their  regular  work  on 
the  sixth  day,  or  during  one-sixth  of  the  time, 
and  engaged  them  at  work  specifically  unpro- 
ductive of  common  needs  and  intrinsically  for 
their,  own,  the  employers' benefits.  They  could 
have  engaged  the  men  in  beautifying  the  grounds 
around  their,  the  employers',  premises,  or  in  or- 
namenting the  exterior  and  interior  of  their 
buildings,  and  in  ministering  to  their  whims  and 
caprices  generall}'.  Or  they  might  have  contin- 
uously engaged  five-sixths  of  the  men  in  the  pro- 
duction of  physical  necessaries  and  kept  the  rest 
as  body  servants.  Proceeding  in  this  way  would 
be  a  draft  upon  the  services  and  energies  of  the 
people  instead  of  upon  properties.  The  under- 
lying principle  is  the  same  in  both.  The  deliv- 
ery of  the  service  is  as  purely  gratuitous  and 
onerous  as  the  delivery  of  tangible  property. 
Both  are  the  act  of  earning  over  again  what  one 
has  earned. 

Draft  upon  services  will  constitute  the  only 
form  of  divestment  of  the  people  when  they  once 
have  been  completely  divested  of  their  freeholds. 
Enough  of  the  masses  will  be  engaged  upon 
staples  to  produce  the  supply,  and  the  balance  ot 
energies  will  be  devoted  to  pandering  to  the 
rich.  One  small  class  will  possess  the  land,  or  liens 
upon  it  equivalent  to  possession,  and  all  the  good- 


142  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

ness  and  splendor  and  luxury  which  can  be  sup- 
plied with  millions  of  teeming  hands,  while  the 
majority  of  the  possessors  of  the  millions  of  teem- 
inor  hands  will  share  nothinsf  but  the  scantiest  of 
diet  and  cov^ering  from  birth  to  the  grave. 

While  the  masses,  or  the  larger  share  of  them, 
still  own  freeholds,  the  larger  share  of  gains  will 
be  devoted  to  the  procurement  of  properties,  either 
to  be  directly  held,  as  are  held  railroads,  manu- 
facturing and  mining  properties,  or  indirectly  held 
throuirh  mortiraCTe  and  bonded  indebtednesses. 
Many  of  the  exactors  will  live  lives  of  com- 
parative cconom}-  that  the}'  may  have  much 
gains  to  devote  to  the  accumulation  of  properties. 
It  could  only  be  expected  that  the  disposition  to 
gain  would  vent  itself  in  the  accumulation  of 
properties,  since  properties  serve  as  the  means  of 
increasing  gains.  When  all  properties  have  been 
laid  hold  on,  the  exactors  have  no  other  outlet 
for  their  gains  except  upon  services.  These 
they  can  utilize  b}'  making  them  serve  purposes 
of  dignification,  pomp,  fancifulness  and  extrava- 
gance. By  that  time,  however,  the  effective- 
ness of  the  masses  as  producers  will  have 
become  so  thoroughly  weakened,  and  the  pro- 
pensities and  desires  of  the  exactors  will  have 
become  so  amplified  and  insatiable,  that  the 
exactors  as  a  class  will  not,  through  the  utter- 
most oppression  of  their  dependents,   be  able  to 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 43 

satisfy  all  their  demands.  When  this  uttermost 
limit  is  reached  everything  conspires  to  bring  on 
governmental  dismemberment  and  collapse. 

We  can  now  perceive  the  characteristic  mode 
of  divestment  involved  in  the  action  of  industrial 
and  trade  monopoly.  Confiscation  of  properties 
without  ceremony,  after  the  manner  practiced 
by  arbitrary  kings  and  emperors  of  olden  times, 
for  instance,  was  sudden  and  palpable.  It  is  not 
so  with  monopolied  divestment.  Properties  are 
absorbed  by  degrees  through  the  settlement  of 
ditierences.  Bringing  people  around  to  a  state  of 
non-freeholdness  and  slavery  by  gains  upon  earn- 
ings and  reconversion  of  gains  into  properties 
lacks  nothing  in  the  way  of  certainty,  however; 
what  it  lacks  is  instantaneousness,  shock  and  ap- 
pearance of  t3Tanny,  and  in  the  eye  of  the  shrewd 
exactor  is  detected  as  the  only  measure  that 
could  be  enforced  in  a  country  where  the  people 
believe  the}'  are  free  and  independent. 

It  might  be  asked,  in  a  system  of  fair  distri- 
bution would  persons  ever  lose  their  properties.'^ 
The  answer  is,  if  an  individual  were  inclined  to  be 
a  do-nothing,  or  a  spendthrift,  or  both,  he  would, 
and  it  would  be  his  own  fault.  But  the  average 
of  such  traits  and  habits  in  all  classes  would  tend 
to  reciprocally  restore  losses  and  keep  up  balances. 
In  unfair  distribution  the  masses  are  compelled 
to  part  with  their  possessions,  out  of  the  nature  of 


T44  •     UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

the  operation  of  unfair  distribution,  and  regardless 
of  whether  they  try  to  save  their  possessions  or 
not. 

Where  was  fair  distribution  there  would  be 
dealings  in  and  exchanges  of  properties  as  now, 
but  as  one  class  would  not  be  constantly  setting 
aside  clear  gains  and  requiring  them  to  be  taken 
back  and  settled  for  with  prepossessions,  each 
class  would  always  hold  its  own.  As  a  conse- 
quence, extra  earnings  seeking  investment,  would 
be  applied  immediatel}'  and  continuously  to  im- 
provements and  the  common  enrichment,  instead 
of  being  set  aside,  held  for  opportunity,  and  used 
as  they  now  are.  And  as  there  would  never  be 
any  over-production,  never  any  industrial  de- 
pression, never  any  stoppage  of  production,  no 
idle  populace  standing  unemployed  and  shouting 
for  work  half  the  year  round,  no  producing  class 
crippled  for  want  of  means  to  eflectually  produce 
with,  wealth  would  accumulate  very  fast  and 
properties  would  soon  assume  a  high  state  of  per- 
fection and  the  people  in  common  would  soon  be 
most  admirably  circumstanced. 

In  maintaining  the  entire  divestment  of  the 
masses  as  a  result  of  unfair  distribution,  it  is  not 
argued  that  the  divestment  of  the  different  in- 
dividuals of  the  masses  will  take  place  propor- 
tionately, each  person  parting  with  a  share  of 
his  possessions  in  each  decade.      Difference  of 


UT^FAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  1 45 

original  circumstances  and  capacities  preclude 
the  intervention  of  the  same  g-uards  and  desfrees 
of  resistances  to  the  divesting  inevitabilities  of 
unfair  distribution.  The  weaker  ones  will  o-q 
first,  and  while  they  are  being  wrecked,  the 
stronger  among  the  masses  will  be  getting 
ahead  to  some  extent  as  compared  with  the 
progress  of  other  members  of  the  masses,  but 
generally  falling  back  as  compared  with  the 
progress  of  the  exactors.  When  the  first 
weaker  have  been  ruined,  then  the  next  weak- 
er will  be  on  the  verge  of  ruin,  the  whole  body 
of  the  masses  being  pushed  down  step  by  step. 
The  process  will  continue  until  the  ruin  is  en- 
compassed of  all  except  now  and  then  a  person 
who  has  been  so  favorably  circumstanced  as  to 
be  able  to  take  advantage  and  get  on  the  eleva- 
tincr  side  of  an  order  of  thing-s  which  tears  down 
the  one  and  builds  up  the  other  out  of  the  ruins. 
Such  an  one,  then,  from  a  necessary  law  of 
man's  nature,  becomes  an  exactor  himself. 
But  for  one  that  goes  up  thousands  will  go 
down  to  toil  and  deprivation  in  the  interest  of 
and  for  the  support  and  aggrandizement  of 
those  who  lord  it  over  them. 

It  is  not  claimed,  either,  that  the  divestment 
of  the  people  will  always  have  on  the  face  of  it 
the  appearance  of  necessity.  Man}-  people  will 
sell   their    properties    from    preference   when    a 


146  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

price  Is  proffered  for  them.  This  looks  very 
voluntar}^  as  long  as  we  do  not  inquire  where 
the  exactors  get  the  money  to  buy  with,  and  do 
not  inquire  too  closely  into  the  motives  of  the 
common  people  in  continually  parting  with  their 
possessions,  and  into  the  necessity  that  impels 
many  to  part  with  their  possessions  in  excess  at 
certain  periods.  It  is  a  maxim  that  good  pa}^- 
ing  properties  do  not  love  to  part  company  with 
their  owners;  it  is  true,  also,  that  a  property 
seeks  to  convey  itself  out  of  ownership  of  him 
who  saves  but  little  of  its  produce  and  into  own- 
ership of  him  who  appropriates  much  of  its  pro- 
duce. The  masses  produce  an  abundance  upon 
their  properties,  the  exactors  appropriate  the 
spare,  and  more  than  can  be  spared,  of  the 
abundance.  This  makes  the  existing  owner 
want  to  sell,  and  the  exactor,  desiring  ready  in- 
vestment for  his  gain,  wishes  to  buy.  Upon  the 
surface  nothing  like  compulsion  is  discoverable. 
Superficial  observation  simply  discloses  that  the 
railroads,  certain  classes  of  manufactories,  mines 
and  other  concerns  are  yielding  enormous  profits. 
That  these  profits  are  reinvested  in  more  rail- 
roads, manufactories,  mines  and  the  like.  That 
after  one  class  of  properties  is  bought  up,  another 
class  of  properties  is  bought  up,  either  in  the 
shape  of  the  properties  themselves,  or  in  the 
shape  of  loans  and  mortgages,  the  twin   equiva- 


UNFAIR      DISTRIBUTION.  I47 

lents  of  ownership,  and  gain  generators  in  an- 
other form.  It  is  thus  that  investment  succeeds 
investment,  and  in  the  absence  of  forced  sales 
there  is  all  the  appearance  of  volun  tariness. 

But  though  voluntary  appearing,  the  whole  is 
coercion;  is  a  rendering  of  the  properties  and 
services  of  the  masses  into  the  hands  of  exactors 
out  of  the  intrinsic  impossibility  of  giving  to  one 
side  the  continuous  advantage  without  balancing 
up  with  properties  or  services,  or  both.  Gain 
continuously  in  one  direction  aggrandizes  the 
recipients  and  distresses  the  surrenderers  irresis- 
tibly. 

OBLIGATORINESS    OF   MONOPOLY. 

Having  seen  that  exaction  in  exchange,  or  un- 
fair distribution  through  industrial  and  trade 
monopoly,  inevitably,  and  by  reason  of  its  being 
a  cause  which  can  have  no  other  efiect,  induces 
to  the  surrender  of  the  people's  properties  and 
spare  services,  we  may  next  appropriately  dis- 
cuss the  quality  of  obligatoriness  which  attaches 
to  this  exaction  or  unfair  distribution.  It  may 
be  asked,  are  the  people  compelled  to  submit  to 
exactions  upon  their  earnings  and  then  to  redeem 
with  their  properties  and  services  the  gains 
which  have  been  exacted  from  them.^ 

One  sufficient  answer  would  be,  that  the  fact 
of  unfair  distribution  and  its   results   implies   the 


148  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

presence  of  a  means  or  instrumentality  powerful, 
deceptive  or  otherwise,  adequate  to  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  same.  Otherwise,  the  judgments  of 
men  would  secure  fairness.  But  when  we  look 
into  the  nature  of  this  instrumentalit}^,  we  find 
it  to  be  compulsory,  and  thoroughly  so.  The^in- 
strumentalit}^  is  the  monopolization  of  businesses 
and  industries.  The  monopolization  being  of 
those  businesses  and  industries  which  relate  to 
the  production,  conveyance  and  trade  in  the 
prime  necessities  of  life;  the  great  railroads  and 
great  mining,  manufacturing  and  other  concerns 
that,  as  businesses  and  industries  are  essential  to 
supply  wants,  yet  disposed  into  the  form  of  mon- 
opolies work  detrimentally,  the  people  are  not 
at  liberty  to  dispense  with  them  upon  any 
grounds  they  may  set  up. 

They  may  be  fully  cognizant  that  they  are 
being  uniformly  and  infamousl}^  cheated  and 
stripped;  they  may  deplore  their  ill-conditioned- 
ness  and  desire,  ever  so  much,  to  avoid  con- 
nection and  communication  with  the  machinery 
that  they  know  is  formed  for  their  miss-usage 
and  wronging;  but  it  would  be  just  as  impossible 
for  them  to  render  themselves  independent  of 
these  monopolies  as  it  would  be  to  render  them- 
selves independent  of  the  needs  for  iron,  clothes, 
coal,  kerosene  and  transportation  services  which 
these  monopolists  control.      The  producer  must 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  1 49 

sell  his  raw  commodity  to  them  and  must 
transport  through  them,  because  there  are  none 
others  to  whom  he  can  go  for  the  purpose  ;  the 
consumer  must  purchase  for  certain  needs  of 
what  they  produce,  because  none  others  are 
allowed  to  produce  in  answer  to  these  needs;  the 
laborer  must  serve  with  them  without  privilege 
of  choice,  because  other  employments  exclude 
when  they  have  absorbed  their  quota  of  laborers. 
Thus  we  see  that  the  people  are  as  necessitated 
to  deal  with  the  monopolists,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  to  submit  to  their  exactions  as  they  are  to 
exert,  eat  and  dress  for  support  of  existence. 

The  same  helplessness  of  state  which  compels 
the  people  to  trade  and  pile  up  surpluses  or  gains, 
in  varied  forms,  compels  them  to  reduce  and 
redeem  these  gains  again  in  such  manner  as  the 
exactors  design.  I  will  restate  that  the  work  of 
converting  gains  into  people's  properties  and  ser- 
vices does  not  look  at  all  times  like  positive  com- 
pulsion. During  the  progress  of  a  decade  the 
monopolists  will  be  continually  converting  their 
gains  into  people's  prepossessions.  In  common 
words,  they  will  be  devoting  their  profits  to  the 
procurement  of  one  class  and  another  of  pro- 
perties throughout  the  country,  directing  their 
acquiring  specifically,  until  all  was  compassed 
that  was  desired,  upon  certain  classes  of  pro- 
perties   which    they    should    begin    with.       For 


150  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

instance,  Vanderbilt,  Gould  and  cohorts  would 
first  possess  themselves  of  all  the  railroads  of  the 
country,  using  the  profits  upon  previously  mono- 
polized lines  to  embarrass  and  take  in  those  rail- 
roads not  within  the  charmed  circle.  In  like 
manner  Rockafeller  and  ring  would  master  the 
oil  business  and  others  would  master  the  iron  and 
coal  industries.  After  these  lines  of  properties 
were  secured,  other  classes  of  properties  would 
become  objects  of  gains,  such  as  bodies  of  lands, 
blocks  in  cities,  timber  tracts,  cattle  herds.  If 
real  properties  were  not  available  or  suited  to 
personal  ownership,  mortgages  upon  properties 
would  be  purchased  and  bonded  indebtednesses. 
At  the  same  time  much  of  these  a'ains  would  be 
converted  into  services  for  adornments,  extrava- 
gances and  luxuriousness.  All  this  would  appear 
voluntary.  Properties  which  the  exactors 
bought  the  owners  were  willing  to  sell,  and 
people  were  more  than  willing,  they  were  anx- 
ious to  minister  to  the  enjoyments,  of  exactors; 
to  part  with  their  services  to  the  exactors.  In 
fact  it  is  voluntary  on  the  part  of  the  people,  if 
that  can  be  called  voluntar}-  which  induces  them, 
after  the  harshness  of  exaction  prevents  them 
from  continuing  profitably  or  even  so  as  to  make 
a  living  at  their  old  vocations,  to  part,  and 
gladly  too,  with  their  properties  and  services  in 
return  for  exacted  gains. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I5I 

But  the  exactors  do  not  get  all  of  their  gains 
converted  into  people's  prepossessions  in  a  semi- 
voluntary  mannerjand  what  they  do  not  get  con- 
verted in  this  way  they  get  converted  by  arbi- 
trary redemption  when  the  conditions  have  rip- 
ened for  the  work.  The  ripened  conditions  are: 
a  flood  of  over-productions,  occasioned  by  the 
self-made  economy  of  the  people  in  tr3'ing  to 
hold  their  properties  intact;  a  general  mone}'- 
lessness  and  indebtedness  of  the  people,  occa- 
sioned by  a  severity  of  exaction  that  left  the 
people  too  little  of  their  own  earnings  to  meet 
the  requirements  of  even  the  severest  exaction; 
a  time  when  goods  and  materials  cannot  be  fur- 
ther accumulated  or  longer  held  without  danger 
of  serious  loss  from  decay  and  shrinkage;  a  time 
when  debts  cannot  be  further  enlarged  without 
their  over-reaching  the  securities  upon  which 
they  are  based;  a  time  when  money  sees  better 
opportunities  of  reward  ahead  than  ordinary 
ways  of  investment  aflbrd;  a  time,  in  short,  when 
for  safety's  sake,  factories  are  closed  down,  set- 
tlements of  debts  are  enforced,  and  the  conver- 
sion current  is  made  ta  be  the  strongest  current. 
Then  is  when  there  is  arbitrary  redemption. 
Monopolists  compel  the  people  to  take  otf  the 
former's  hands  the  surplus  stocks  they  have  ac- 
cumulated, by  refraining  from  the  manufacture 
of  more  until  these  are  disposed  of.     Exactors 


152  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

force  to  disownership,  directly  or  by  permanent 
debt  lien,  those  who  are  deeply  in  debt,  and  the 
money — it  comes  out  and  takes  in  the  properties 
at  a  song,  or  makes  settlements  at  a  great  shave. 
During  this  time,  known  as  industrial  depression, 
there  is  an  under-current  of  production  and  ctis- 
tomary  exaction  going  on,  but  the  main  current 
is  the  conversion  current,  and  it  maintains  the' 
ascendency  until  the  surpluses  have  been  well  re- 
duced. 

It  can  be  readily  seen  how  factory  stocks  can 
be  reduced  by  the  stoppage  of  manufacture  un- 
til they  are  disposed  of,  but  perhaps  not  so  read- 
ily understood  how  agricultural  produce  can  be 
reduced  while  agriculturalists  go  on  producing 
in  a  manner  without  coming  to  full  stop  as  fac- 
tories are  accustomed  to  do.  Let  it  be  under- 
stood that  during  industrial  depressions  agricul- 
tural work  is  litful  and  diversive,low  prices  caus- 
ing this  class  of  people  to  be  trying  at  one  spec- 
ialty and  then  at  another  in  order  to  find  some- 
thing that  will  pay,  and  that  this  vain  experi- 
menting entails  great  loss  and  greatly  reduced 
production.  Then  much  of  agricultural  pro- 
duce spoils  in  elevators  and  in  farmer's  bins,  and 
it  can  be  shown  that  wars  and  famines  are  in- 
duced by  unfair  distribution,  and  are  potent 
agencies  for  reducing  surpluses  of  all  kinds,  and 
invariably  at  the  expense  of  the  masses. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 53 

It  can  be  now  understood  that  the  exactors 
have  it  in  their  power  to  compel  the  people  to 
deal  with  them,  and  to  give  them  the  advantage; 
they  have  it  in  their  power  to  obtain  from  the 
people  in  a  semi-voluntary  manner  their  pos- 
sessions and  services  as  events  progress  ;  they 
have  it  in  their  power,  by  closing  down  indus- 
tries and  enforcing  settlements  of  debts,  to  com- 
pel the  people  to  take  back  the  gains  which  have 
been  exacted  from  them,  and  to  give  their  pre- 
possessions— fixed  properties  and  services — in 
exchanore  for  them. 

Exaction  and  forced  divestment  may  be  de- 
fined as  the  denial  to  a  people  of  a  decent  living 
by  cheating  them  out  of  their  earnings,  then  the 
denial  to  them  of  any  living  except  as  they  are 
cheated  out  of  their  properties  in  exchange  for 
their  earnings.  The  season  of  compulsory  di- 
vestment is  attended  with  a  series  of  ill-circum- 
stances which  make  it  a  season  of  greatest  hard- 
ship to  the  people.  Among  the  circumstances 
of  extra  hardship  may  be  mentioned,  first,  the 
forcible  dispossession  of  many  person  which  en- 
tail sacrifices  in  the  way  of  costs  of  official  pro- 
ceedings, foreclosures,  and  low  offers,  that 
amount  next  to  the  outright  robbery  of  persons 
because  they  have  fallen  victims  to  a  dire  and 
outrageous  effect. 

Another  circumstance  is  the  extra  taxation 


154  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION 

entailed  to  support  the  laborless  and  foodless,  to 
build  poor  houses  for  the  confirmed  beggaring, 
and  to  build  jails  and  penitentiaries,  and  to  de- 
fray expense  of  machinery  for  intercepting,  try- 
inp  and  incarceratinof  those  who  have  gfone  into 
crime  rather  than  into  beggary  to  maintata 
that  which  mankind  is  so  tenacious  of,   lite. 

Another  circumstance  is  that  this  period  im- 
pinges stingingly  upon  the  domain  of  the  feelings, 
forming  another  reason  why  it  is  extraordinarily 
severe.  To  fail  to  take  the  emotions  into  account 
in  calculating  the  sum  of  the  causes  of  human 
happiness  is  to  leave  out  the  biggest  half  of  the 
element.  One  who  has  not  been  thoroughly 
imbruted  and  calloused  against  shame  by  poverty 
and  denial  would  rather  live  on  bread  and  water 
than  be  forced  to  the  acceptance  of  an  alternative 
which  savors  of  ignominy  and  loss  of  public 
esteem.  The  property  holder  who  can  sell  his 
propert}'  in  a  semi-voluntary  manner  is  relieved 
of  the  worst  features  of  an  inevitable  performance. 
If  he  must  sell,  the  avoidance  of  forced  sale  is 
also  avoidance  of  violation  of  his  self-respect  and 
self-esteem. 

To  the  ordinary  laborer  nothing  can  be  more 
afflictive  and  soul  torturing  than  the  necessity 
to  go  upon  charity  or  to  seek  the  poorhouse  for 
an  extension  of  stay  upon  mother  earth.  Many 
seek    suicide    first.     Thousands,     preferably    to 


JNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  1 55 

humiliating  themselves  thus,  resort  to  every  trick 
and  device,  innocent  or  criminal,  which  can  be 
invented  or  perfomed,  to  live  well  or  poorly,  as 
circumstances  permit,  and  usually  to  hnd  them- 
selves at  last  arraigned  and  convicted  for  mis- 
actions  and  compelled  at  last  to  march  into  the 
poorhouse,  or  perchance  worse,  the  chain  gang  or 
prison  pen.  Humiliation  overtakes  them  after 
all  their  efforts,  to  at  least  appear  respectable 
when  want  of  proper  employment  prevented 
them  from  acting  respectably.  It  is  the  tilings  of 
the  nature  here  depicted,  the  embodiments  and 
manifestations  of  the  excess  or  culminating^  effects 
of  unfair  distribution  which  make  the  panic 
periods  less  endurable  than  the  decades  which 
precede  them. 

ADVANTAGE    SOUGHT. 

We  may  now  inquire  into  the  extent  of  the 
purpose  and  practice  of  the  exactors  to  take  the 
advantage. 

By  a  little  examination  we  can  satisfy  our- 
selves that  is  their  purpose  and  practice  to  take 
the  whole  advantage;  that  is,  that  it  is  their  pur- 
pose to  reduce  the  masses  of  the  people  to  a  state 
of  non-freeholdness  and  servitude  as  rapidly  as 
the  methods  employed  will  allow;  that  they  force 
those  who  are  completcl}'  dependent  upon  them 
for  support  to  maintain  themselves  upon  a  bare 


156  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

subsistence;  that  it  is  their  purpose  to  reduce  as 
rapidly  as  possible  the  whole  mass  of  people  until 
the  rank  and  file  of  them  rest  upon  the  base  of 
lowest  life  support. 

Let  me  explain  here  that  the  lower  rank  and 
and  file  of  industrians,  the  ordinary  laborers,  t4^e 
commoner  class  of  mechanics,  merchants,  agri- 
culturists and  others  professionally  or  otherwise 
engaged,  will  always  have  some  to  rank  above 
them,  because  of  innate  differences  in  men  and 
situations.  Some  will  rank  above  to  a  certain 
degree,  because  of  superiority  of  natural  talent, 
luck  or  pre-disposed  circumstances.  Many 
things,  evident  to  any  one,  intervene  to  preclude 
the  indiscriminate  precipitation  of  a  whole  body 
of  people  to  exactly  the  same  level.  With  the 
most  pliable  class,  the  mere  employe,  it  cannot 
be  done.  Corporations,  for  instance,  are  in  need 
of  skilled  bosses  and  skilled  workman,  and  higher 
wages  must  be  paid  to  induce  this  skill,  as  skill 
manifestly  would  not  be  induced  if  it  commanded 
no  more  reward  than  the  commonest  service. 
So  when  we  talk  of  people  being  reduced  to  the 
lowest  base  of  subsistence,  we  must  remember 
that  there  will  rank  some  above  that  base,  be- 
cause they  could  not  be  pushed  down  to  it, 
without  the  others  being  pushed  below  it  and  to 
starvation  and  destruction.  This  the  exactors 
would  not  find  it  to  their  interests  to  do  since  it  is 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  157 

their  business  to  subsist  and  luxuriate  off  the 
exertions  of  the  masses. 

That  it  is  the  purpose  and  practice  of  the  ex- 
actors to  take  the  whole  advantage,  as  outhned 
above,  is,  in  the  first  place,  inferable  from  the 
nature  of  the  instrumentality  of  monopoly.  Upon 
an  inquir}^  into  the  nature  of  a  monopol3',\ve  find 
that  it  confers  absolute  power.  The  monopoly 
of  any  business  or  industry  means  sole  control 
over  that  business  or  industry.  Sole  control 
means  power  to  compel  all  persons  in  need  of 
such  services,  wages  or  commodities  as  are  con- 
trolled, to  deal  with  him  who  controls  them,  sub- 
ject to  this  one's  self-proposed  terms.  Thus  w^e 
see,  as  to  anything  monopolized,  he  who  monop- 
olizes it  is  bound  by  no  social  law  superior,  to 
his  own  caprice.  In  any  business  connected  with 
the  supply  of  wants  he  is  enabled  to  disre- 
gard, if  he  wish,  all  the  legitimate  rules  of  trade 
and  laws  of  prices,  and,  to  the  extent  to  which 
the  people  are  bound  to  deal  with  him,  to  capri- 
ciously ov^erride  their  rights  and  interests. 

Now,  incidental  circumstances  having  brought 
one  into  the  possession  of  a  monopoly,  the  con- 
scientiousness of  such  an  individual  might  deter 
him  from  abusing  his  privilege;  the  preponder- 
ance of  chances,  however,  are,  that  he  would 
make  the  most  of  his  opportunity.  In  those  in- 
stances,   however,     in    which    monopolies    have 


158  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

been  the  consummation  of  persistent  and  perti- 
nacious seeking,  scheming  and  building  up  of 
self  as  opposed  to  ruin  of  competitors — a  con- 
summation characteristic  of  the  few  great  mon- 
opolies which  we  have  in  this  country — there  is 
no  doubt  as  to  the  course  those  who  control  them 
will  take;  the  inference  is  patent  that  they  will 
use  them  not  only  to  their  advantage,  but  to 
their  greatest  advantage. 

This  conclusion  we  are  justified  in  forming, 
from  our  universal  instruction  that  means  and 
ends  always  are,  or  are  designed  to  be,  commen- 
surate or  in  unison  one  with  the  other.  The 
question  is  intuitivel}'  intruded:  "  If  not  for  sole 
advantage,  why  sole  opportunity  ?"  It  would  be 
contrary  to  our  modes  of  thinking,  as  superin- 
duced by  common  observation  and  experience, 
to  suppose  that  men  who  will  work  and  scheme 
to  get  sole  control,  and  complete  authority  to 
coerce,  will  do  other  than  dictate  the  most  self- 
seeking  terms  consistent  with  the  power  of 
others  to  3ield. 

The  inferences  are  backed  by  facts.  Unqual- 
ified proof  of  the  disposition  to  take  every  advan- 
tage is  given  in  the  extreme  contrasts  existing 
between  the  monopolists  and  those  whom  they 
have  got  completely  under  their  control,  like 
the  employes  directly  and  necessarily  dependent 
upon  them  for  a  living. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 59 

The  exactors  we  find  in  ownership  of  great 
raih^oad  interests,  mining  interests,  manulacturing 
and  other  interests  which  they  have  consoHdated 
to  prevent  the  independent  and  competitive 
management  of  separate  concerns.  These,  we 
must  mind,  constitute  a  basis  of  wealth  and  are 
the  indications  of  a  series  of  profits  remarkable 
alike  for  their  mammothness,  speed  of  accu- 
mulation, and  recentness  of  origin.  The  personal 
livings  and  modes  of  living  of  these  giants  of 
wealth  are  in  keeping  with  their  circumstances. 
They  live  in  costly  mansions  adorned  with  the 
most  extravagant  embellishments,  genius  and 
dexterity  can  fashion.  These  are  complemented 
with  furnishings  which  have  taxed  for  their  pro- 
curement the  labor  and  skill  of  the  most  finished 
artists  for  months  and  for  years.  At  the  behests 
of  the  occupants  of  these  mansions  the  world  is 
ransacked  to  get  suitable  attire  and  ornament 
for  their  persons  and  suitable  food  and  drink  to 
tickle  their  palates.  Experts  stiid}^  how  to  ad- 
minister to  their  wants  and  retinues  of  servants 
anticipate  their  every  desire.  They  convey 
tliemselves  in  the  most  costly  transports,  luxuriate 
in  expensive  summer  villas  and  go  sight  seeing 
to  resorts  of  attraction  in  every  approachable 
part  of  the  globe.  What  one  such  a  family 
spends  for  pleasure  above  personal  comforts  alone, 
would   keep  a  thousand  families   of  the  opposite 


l6o  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

extreme  in  what  would  be  considered  by  them 
plenty  and  affluence. 

What  is  the  condition  of  that  class  of  persons 
who  sustain  the  relation  to  this  opulent  class  of 
dependents  upon  them  for  the  sustenance  of  life? 
I  have  reference  to  the  wage -workers  emplo5ied 
in  their  mines,  their  shops,  their  factories  and 
elsewhere,  the  body  and  bulk  of  whom  comprise 
the  base  of  the  fabric  of  human  toil  and  upon 
which  certain  grades  rest  that  necessitate 
higher  pa}'.  Do  not  say  that,  living  in  a 
free  country,  this  class  of  persons  are  pri- 
vileged to  go  elsewhere  and  improve  their 
situations.  It  is  crowning  infamy  with  insult  to 
first  encompass  certain  industries  which  labor 
must  seek  to  get  its  suppl}'  absorbed,  and  then 
say  the  wage  workers  are  privileged  to  seek  em- 
ployment where  they  like.  Just  as  the  people  are 
compelled  to  patronize  these  industries,  because 
they  are  essential  to  the  people's  existence,  and  as 
much  so  after  as  before  they  -are  monopolized,  so 
laborers  are  compelled  to  seek  employment  at 
them,  because  they  are  a  part  of  the  operations 
which  take  up  the  labor  of  the  country;  in  other 
words,  laborers  are  pushed  into  them,  whether 
willing  or  not,  because  other  employments  exclude 
after  they  have  absorbed  a  supply  of  labor  pro- 
portioned to  the  share  or  ratio  of  subsistence 
they  must  suppl}'.     The  laborers  of  monopolists 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  l6l 

must,  of  necessity,  work  for  them.  In  what  con- 
dition then,  I  repeat,  do  we  find  the  laborers  of 
the  great  monopoHsts,  of  those  individuals  whose 
fortunes  are  so  vast,  for  whose  gratification  and 
amusement  mone}'  flows  as  water  from  beneath 
the  rock?  It  is  not  necessary  to  dilate.  Their 
condition  is  well  known  the  world  over,  and  can 
be  summed  up  in  a  sentence.  It  is  that  of  a  poor, 
rent-ra  eked, over-worked,  poorl3'-habited,  stomach- 
pinched  people,  working  every  day  that  they  get 
means  enough  to  keep  soul  and  body  together 
and  destined  to  live  upon  charity  when  the  work 
plays  out.  When  they  luxuriate,  it  is  in  the  na- 
ture of  half-sunday  saunterings  around  the  scenes 
of  their  labor  and  visits  to  grogshops,  because 
poverty  does  not  close  the  heart  to  enjoyment 
and  no  other  means  of  enj03-ment  can  they  aftbrd. 
AVhen  the}'  transport  themselves,  it  is  on  a  hunt 
for  a  job,  with  danger  of  being  jailed  for  a  tramp 
on  the  way,  and  when  they  rest  it  is  enforced 
idleness,  because  so  much  has  been  produced  that 
no  more  is  needed. 

What  do  we  get  from  this  immense  and  rap- 
idly developed  contrast  between  the  conditions 
of  the  monopolists  and  their  hired  laborers,  but 
thorough  support  of  the  declaration  that  it  is  the 
permanent  purpose  of  the  monopolists,  and 
practice  where  possible,  to  take  the  whole  advan- 
tage of  the  people.     When    we  contrast  their 


1 62  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

immense  wealth  and  rapid  accretions  with  the 
miserable  and  denied  condition  of  their  employ- 
es, and  have  blazoned  the  disparity  of  their 
ability  to  remunerate  with  the  actuality  of  their 
remuneration,  we  get  no  .grounds  for  assuming 
that  profits  enter  as  an  element  in  the  considera- 
tion or  fixing  of  wages.  We  get  no  grounds 
for  any  inference  other  than  that  it  is  their  pur- 
pose and  policy  in  all  their  dealings  with  others 
to  fix  forced  compensations  and  terms  in  favor 
of  themselves,  and  that  to  the  utmost  degree 
and  extent. 

If  any  one  denies  that  their  purpose  and 
practice  is  as  here  set  forth,  then  I  ask,  how 
much  lower  could  the  wages  of  the  common 
class  of  laborers — the  class  of  essentially  lowest 
limit,  be  reduced  and  wholesale  starvation, 
barring  perpetual  charity,  be  averted  !  What 
signifies  the  aggrandized  condition  and  constant 
and  rapid  accretions  of  the  monopolists  every- 
where, in  contrast  with  and  related  to  the  thor- 
oughly impoverished  condition  of  their  employes, 
if  it  does  not  signify  gain  -  getting  for  the 
monopolists  down  to  the  exact  verge  of  the 
delivering  victims'  stintcdest  support. 

The  exactors  are  pressing  this  principle  of 
greed  as  hard  against  the  property-holding  mid- 
dle classes  as  they  are  against  their  immediate 
dependents.       The   manifestations  among  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 63 

middle-classes  are  not  the  same  as  among  the 
dependent  employes,  but  that  is  because  they 
are  not  designed  so  to  be.  The  monopolists 
want  to  rapidly  divest  the  people  of  their  pro- 
perties. That  is  how  they  apply  the  principle  of 
sole  advantage  as  against  the  middle  classes. 
The  requisite  for  rapid  divestment  is  large  gains. 
To  get  this  two  things  are  essential:  lively  pro- 
duction by  the  party  to  be  divested ;  the  surrender 
by  him  of  all  that  can  be  spared  above  what  must 
be  had  for  a  frugal  subsistence  and  the  lively 
production  of  more.  As  the  leaving  enough  for  a 
frugal  subsistence  and  the  lively  production  of 
more  would  not  go  with  absolute  stintedness,  we 
would  fail  if  we  looked  for  extreme  stintedness 
and  self-denial  among  the  common  property- 
holding  class  to  get  proof  that  the  monopolists 
were  taking  the  greatest  advantage  possible  of 
the  people.  As  again,  we  find  that  the  majority 
of  people  among  the  middle  classes  save  out  of 
their  earnings  nothing  more  than  a  frugal  living, 
this  fact,  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  many 
other  facts  we  have  portrayed,  prove  that  the 
exactors  are  appropriating  the  properties  of  the 
common  people,  by  actual  or  mortgage  title,  as 
fast  as  the  instrumentalities  employed  will- allow. 
I  think  now,  from  the  considerations  in  this 
chapter  presented,  the  fair  minded  should  be 
satisfied  of  these  facts: 


164  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

That  unfair  distribution,  through  monopoly  of 
businesses  and  industries,  is  a  method  of  commerce 
in  which  one  class  is  compelled  to  deal  with 
another  and  to  give  that  other  all  the  adv^antages 
there  are  in  the  barfrains. 

That  the  result  must  be  total  and  most  expe- 
ditious divestment  of  the  one  class  for  the  ag- 
grandizement of  another  class. 

That  industrial  and  trade  exaction,  hard  of 
itself  to  bear  is  but  the  prelude  and  pathway  to 
the  harshest  exaction  the  human  kind  can  subsist 
under,  or  even  harsher  than  the}'  can  survive. 

That  tliose  who  occupy  the  position  between 
the  exactors  and  their  lower  class  dependents,  the 
middle  class  so  called,  entertain  delusive  ideas  if 
they  think  they  are  benetitted  b}'  detentions  from 
lower  class  earnings,  or  if  they  imagine  they  are 
not  destined  to  be  subjected  to  a  like  system  of 
detention. 

That  if  the  earth  were  ten  times  asfmitful  as 
it  is,  and  the  productiveness  of  human  effort  were 
ten  times  as  great  as  seen  to  be,  existing  regula- 
tions would  cause  want  to  stalk  forth  no  less 
reall}',  pervadingly  and  inflictively  than  now. 

That  it  is  a  horrible  and  shameful  fact,  yet 
true,  that  the  demon  of  want-death  and  starvation 
can  reap  victims  with  as  great  facility  in  the  land 
of  plenty  and  wealth-teeming  cities  as  he  can  in 
the  land  of  barbarianism,  barrenness  and  famine. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1^5 

Finally,  that  unfair  distribution  is  an  evil  cause 
which  can  generate  nothing  but  a  train  of  evil 
etfects,  the  finality  of  which  would  be  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  mass  of  mankind,  did  not  revolution 
or  break-up  always  intervene  to  change  the  course 
of  things  and  save  the  people,  not  from  the  evils 
of  exaction,  but  from  the  most  disastrous  conse- 
quences of  exaction. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


WARS  AND  RUMORS  OF  WARS. 

It  is  not  uncommon  to  hear  and  read  wails 
upon  the  non-pacific  virtues  of  modern  civiliza- 
tion and  upon  the  imperceptibility  of  the  ad- 
vance of  our  ideas  beyond  the  war  spirit,  as  if 
the  predisposing  cause  had  been  removed  or  in 
any  way  mollified,  as  if  there  were  not  exaction 
and  aggressiveness,  and  they  as  rampant,  ra- 
pacious and  intolerable  in  character  now  as  they 
ever  were  during  any  previous  period  of  history. 
Just  as  if  our  advance  in  political  and  social 
affairs  has  not  been  uniformly  an  advance  in  the 
refinements  of  exaction  instead  of  advance  in 
freedom  from  exaction.  All  this  is  so  plain  that 
he  who  runs  may  read  if  he  but  discard  his  trav- 
sty  glasses  and  look  with  the  naked  eye. 

Exaction  and  aggression  haye  changed  forms 
and  adopted  new  guises  and  methods,  but  that 
there  is  less  of  either  or  an  abatement  of  the 
evils  growing  out  of  either,  it  devolves  upon 


UNFAIR      DISTRIBUTION.  1 67 

him  who  so  asserts  to  prove.  To  my  mind  the 
contrary  is  so  apparent  as  to  need  no  argument 
to  estabHsh  it,  and  none  for  that  purpose  will  be 
here  employed. 

Civilization  has  advanced  us  in  certain  direc- 
tions. Besides  advancing  us  in  other  things,  it 
has  refined  us  in  the  art  of  exacting  ;  it  has  also 
refined  us  in  the  arts  of  war.  We  do  not  carry 
oft'  people's  goods  bodil}',  as  was  done  in  olden 
times,  or  as  is  done  amonguncivilized  peoples  at 
the  present  da}';  neither  do  we  surprise  and  mas 
sacre  people  in  order  to  get  their  goods.  We  do 
not  now  exact  through  chattel  slavery  as  we  did 
in  recent-past  times,  neither  do  we  invade,  over- 
power and  carry  otY  people  into  chattel  slaver}'. 
We  have  "  improved."  We  have  a  more 
"civilized  "  way  of  doing  such  things.  We  exact 
by  monopoly,  taxation  and  debt-building,  and  we 
"  declare"  war,  and  conduct  it  with  reference  to 
certain  formalities  which  civilization  recognizes 
and  compels  compliance  with.  This  is  acts  and 
deeds  same  in  substance,  but  different  in  the  modes 
of  performance.  It  is  inglorious  murdererand 
vile  plunderer becomerespectable  by  donning  the 
soubriquet  of  valorous  warrior  and  smart  financier. 
That  is  as  much  as  we  can  credit  to  civilization 
in  these  regards.  We  exact  and  reduce  the 
masses  of  the  people  to  want  and  beggary,  just  as 
certainly  as  did  our  less  civilized  projenitors,  and 


l6S  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

on  account  thereof,  we  have  wars  and  kill  and 
destroy  just  as  inevitably  as  did  they.  The  two 
are  not  separable.  As  long  as  nations  are  to 
be  run  by  class  exactors,  and  in  the  interest  of 
class  exactors,  so  long  wiil  tl^ere  be  wars  for  the 
very  reason  that  class  exaction  makes  wars  ^- 
pedient  or  desirable  from  several  different  stand- 
points, as  we  may  show. 

War  is  advocated  from  the  standpoint  of  bet- 
terment of  times,  from  the  speculative,  which  is 
the  exactor ''s  standpoint  and  from  the  standpoint 
of  revolt.  That  is,  amongst  the  masses  war  is 
advocated  as  a  panacea  for  industrial  depression, 
hard  times  and  the  general  ills  of  over-production. 
Exactors  frequently  abet  and  encourage  and  plan 
wars  for  sake  of  self-enrichment.  People  are 
driven  to  war  in  resistance  to  exactions  that  have 
become  intolerable.  In  each  case  we  see  that 
exaction  has  been  behind  the  war,  and  therefore, 
that  the  influence  of  civilization  must  be  to 
suspend  exaction  before  wars  can  be  suspended. 
Let  us  notice  further  each  case  in  turn. 

STANDPOINT    OF    HARD    TIMES    REFORM. 

It  is  not  uncommon  to  hear  the  oppressed 
victims  of  exaction  advocating  war  as  a  panacea 
for  the  ills  of  over-production.  They  reason  that 
war  creates    demand  and  activity,  and  that  it  is 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  169 

better  to  have  demand  and  activity  with  war 
than  to  liave  over-supply  and  inactivit}^  in 
peace  ;  therefore  war.  We  must  suppose  of 
course  that  such  persons  see  no  further  ahead  tlian 
to  the  end  of  iitst  results.  Tliey  evidently  be- 
lieve that  surpluses  accrue  in  some  mysterious  and 
uncontrollable  way,  and  that  wars  annihilate  them 
in  such  manner  as  to  leave  no  emanation  of  their 
forming  to  work  future  harm.  The}^  hardly 
reason  that  the  extinguishment  of  surpluses  in 
war  is  but  the  quick  and  costly  metamorphosis  of 
them  into  prepossessions,  principally  in  form  of 
public  debt  lien,  and  they  hardl}'  reason  that  the 
debt  being  an  added  factor  of  exaction,  adds  to 
the  frequency  and  severit}'  of  the  periods  of  in- 
dustrial depression  and  hard  times.  We  must 
suppose  that  they  see  the  advantages  of  the  ac- 
tivities and  demands  born  of  war,  and  that  they  no 
further  see,  or  else  we  could  not  conceive  why 
they  should  covet  war. 

That  a  preponderance  of  good  feeling  and 
satisfaction  should  be  reconcilable  with  the  ex- 
istence and  maintenance  of  a  burdensome,  de- 
structive and  heart-rending  war,  so  much  so  as 
to  make  it  wished  for  by  many,  appears  odd,  yet 
it  is  so  reconcilable,  upon  the  theory  that  a  less 
evil  is  more  endurable  than  a  greater  one.  The 
fancy  or  eagerness  for  war,  when  industrial  de- 
pression is  harrying   a    people,    results  from  the 


170  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

menacing  and  ruining  character  of  productions 
when  once  they  have  been  absorbed  away  from 
the  masses  and  placed  at  the  sole  disposition  of  a 
few  merciless  exactors.  People  would  engage  in 
wide-wasting,  burdensome  and  murderous  war 
for  the  dissipation  of  them,  rather  than  go  through 
the  alternative  ot  forced  sale  or  mortage  making, 
forced  begging  and  forced  stealing. 

Rather  than  impair  their  home  possessions  the 
people  would  toil  and  produce  and  contribute  to 
keep  men  engaged  in  carnage  and  destruction; 
rather  than  suffer  the  ignomin}',  contumely  and 
disgrace  attached  to  pauperism,  trampism  and 
prisonism,  they  would  march  foot  sore  through 
shuddering  rains  and  burning  sunshine  and  stand 
as  a  wall  before  destructive  shells  and  bullets. 
Between  the  two  alternatives,  both  unwelcome, 
war  is  preferred.  That  is  the  secret  of  the  desire 
on  the  part  of  one  large  class  for  war.  As  the 
sentiment  is  born  of  the  consequences  of  exaction, 
so  the  war  spirit  from  this  source  must  be  laid  to 
the  door  of  exaction. 

exactors'  standpoint. 

Motives  of  different  sort  impel  the  exactors 
into  wanting  war.  War  is  money  to  them.  Just 
as  the  victims  of  exaction  want  war,  because  the}* 
think  it  causes   the   quick  and  everlasting  anni- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I  7  I 

hilation  of  surpluses,  so  the  exactors  want  war, 
because  they  know  it  causes  the  quick  conversion 
of  their  surphises  upon  fancy  terms  for  them. 

In  the  earher  and  richer  da3's  of  a  common 
people  intestine  wars  are  the  most  popular  with 
exactors.  Wars  of  outside  conquest  are  the  most 
popular  with  them  when  they  have  got  their 
home  people  well  impoverished.  To  use  the 
present  case  :  the  national  polic}-  of  the  United 
States  is  not  one  which  meditates  aggression  upon 
outsiders.  Our  country  is  too  new  for  that  yet. 
The  field  for  exaction  is  too  good  an  one  at  home 
for  exactors  to  think  3-et  of  tr3'ing  their  hands 
upon  the  subjects  of  other  countries.  There  is 
too  large  a  class  here  who  have  not  yet  been  re- 
duced to  the  lowest  stage  of  subsistence  ;  too 
many  who  are  still  good  subjects  for  plucking  for 
exactors  to  think  yet  of  casting  their  eyes  abroad. 
Besides,  an  immense  amount  of  land  remains  3'et 
to  be  settled  upon  and  made  productive  of  rents, 
interest  and  profit  to  exactors.  In  short,  the  gen- 
eral industrial  class  of  the  Union  has  not  been 
reduced  to  any  thing  like  the  stringent  condition 
which  makes  aggressive  warfare  more  profitable 
than  present  methods  of  home  exaction,  and  until 
the3'  have  been  so  reduced  our  policy  will  be  one 
of  peace  with  outsiders. 

It  cannot  be  said  that  we  will  try  extremely 
hard  to  keep  peace  within.    Home  wars  in  thrifty 


172 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


countries  are  easy  of  ignition.  Exactors  abet 
and  encourage  them  instead  of  throw  their  in- 
fluence against  them.  They  have,  occasion 
justifying,  looked  the  case  over.  They  see  that 
the  people  can  yield  up  much  more  than  they  are 
yielding.  A  large  portion  of  them  are  not  onty 
doing  well  but  are  growing  richer.  They  can 
stand  greatly  increased  taxation.  So  when  threat- 
ening appears,  the  war  spirit  is  encouraged.  If 
there  can  be  war,  gain-getting  will  be  accelerated. 
The  exactors  will  profit  from  the  increased  sur- 
plusages which  increased  activit}'  gives;  from  the 
disposal  of  their  surpluses  at  fancy  prices;  by  the 
advancement  of  goverment  funds  upon  speculat- 
ing terms;  and  by  the  opportunity  which  their  ad- 
vantages gives  them  to  run  financial  measures  in 
their  own  interests.  This  is  a  good  thing  for  the 
exactors,  so  long  as  the  people  are  thrifty  enough 
to  bear  the  extra  loading,  and  they  encourage 
wars  at  home. 

When  the  people  have  been  loaded  with  all 
they  can  stand  up  under,  then  the  exactors  throw 
their  influence  against  intestine  wars.  They 
preach  against  internal  dissentions,  refuse  to 
invest  in  credits  for  such  purposes,  and  force  the 
authorities  to  resort  to  peaceful  modes  of 
settling  their  grievances. 

After  this  there  obtains  the  aggressive  polic}' 
with  regard  to  weaker  nations.    Our  own  country 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 73 

can  be  expected  to  become  an  aggressive  one 
when  our  own  people  have  been  got  well  yoked 
and  3'ielding.  Aggressive  wars  are  for  the  ex. 
tension  of  exacting  devices  abroad,  when  they 
cannot  be  further  extended  or  amplitied  at  home. 
A  modern  method  of  procedure  is  to  fix  upon  a 
prosperous,  but  unwarlike  or  inadequately  strong 
countr}',  trade  and  tamper  with  the  inhabitants 
until  a  pretext  arises  for  war,  when  they  can  be 
subjugated  and  reduced  to  the  same  condition  that 
prevails  among  the  masses  of  the  subjugating 
country. 

The  vigorous  or  lax  prosecution  of  a  war  de- 
pends upon  the  good  or  poor  degree  of  chance 
there  is  to  make  some  set  of  subjects  foot  the 
cost.  Where  thrifty  masses  can  be  found  to 
saddle  a  debt  upon,  there  will  always  be  vigorous 
wars.  It  will  be  so,  because  the  exactors  will  find 
it  to  their  interests  to  see  that  plenty  of  means 
are  advanced  to  furnish  plent}'  of  men,  plenty  of 
rations,  plenty  of  pay,  plent}-  of  weapons,  plenty 
of  munitions  and  plent}^  of  everything  which  go 
to  make  good  regiments  and  good  fighting.  The 
adage  that  "  mone}' makes  the  mare  go,"  applies 
in  soldiery  and  war  as  in  everything  else.  It  is 
only  in  cases  where  the  exactors  see  no  chance  to 
make  somebody  else  pay  the  bill,  that  wars  are 
conducted  in  a  half-hearted  and  irresolute  manner. 
England's    war    in    the   Soudan  is  an  example. 


1^4  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

There  was  no  chance  for  the  exactors  to  get  any- 
thing out  of  the  Soudanese  if  they  conquered 
them,  and  no  chance  to  saddle  the  debt  of  a  vig- 
orous war  upon  their  home  subjects,  since  the 
latter  are  burdened  with  all  the  debt  they  can 
now  pay  interest  upon.  Hence  the  poor  figtHie 
cut  in  the  Soudan. 

The  same  irresoluteness  characterizes  Eng- 
land's resistance  to  the  forces  menacing  her 
Asiatic  possessions.  There  the  exactors  have 
nothing  to  gain  but  merely  to  save.  They  are 
making  all  off  the  subjects  of  India  now,  that  the 
subjects  can  yield.  To  save  the  country  gives 
no  chance  of  profit  and  spare  chance  for  an  even 
return.  Therefore,  India  is  to  be  saved,  if  saved, 
at  the  expense  of  the  honor  and  dignity  of  the 
mother  land.  England,  so  skilled  and  powerful 
in  the  art  of  war  as  to  be  able  to  conquer  almost 
any  nation  that  would  make  good  plucking  for 
her  exactors,  is  like  an  imbecile  old  crone  when 
it  comes  to  warring  with  nothing  to  pluck  in 
sight. 

We  thus  see,  that  from  the  exactors*  standpoint, 
there  will  always  be  wars  while  the  principle  of 
exaction  maintains  in  the  government  of  countries, 
because  there  will  always  be  occasions  when  the 
exactors  will  find  it  to  their  interests  to  have 
wars. 

A  lesson  to  be  learned  here,  is  one  in  regard  to 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 75 

the  decline  and  fall  of  nations.  When  a  country's 
masses  have  been  loaded  to  full  yielding  capacity 
with  exacting  devices,  the  nation  has  arrived  at 
the  crystal  state  when  it  readily  succumbs  to  the 
blows  of  extraneous  forces.  And  this  circum- 
stance is  not  blamable  nearly  so  much  to  the  de- 
generacy of  the  masses,  as  it  is  to  the  ava- 
riciousness  of  the  exactors.  The  latter  will  not 
contribute  of  their  own  in  patriotic  defense. 
Rather  than  yield  up  an}'  share  they  possess  for 
the  perpetuation  of  existing  government,  they  will 
risk  the  chances  of  preserving  their  gains  and 
continuing  exactors  under  an  altered  rule. 

STANDPOINT    OF    REVOLT. 

Revolt  as^ainst  the  intolerableness  of  exaction 
is  the  occasion  of  wars. 

People  do  not  revolt  against  moderate  exac- 
tion. It  would  be  right  to  do  so  but  they  do  not. 
History  proves  that  the  exactors  have  been 
royally  sustained  in  the  business  of  exaction,  as 
long  as  they  have  observed  a  decent  regard  for 
people's  bare  stomachs,  bare  bodies,  and  bare 
lives.  The  latter  have  always  peacably  permitted 
themselves  to  be  deprived  of  the  betterments  of 
life  which  they  were  entitled  to.  But  naked- 
ness and  starvation  has  frequently  stirred  them 
to  revolt,  causing  them  to  j^^ain  nothincf  some- 


1^6  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

times,  concessions  at  other  times,  and  at  still 
other  times,  occasioning  them  to  succeed  in 
freeing  themselves  entirely  from  their  oppres- 
sors. 

It  may  be  remarked,  however,  that  when  a 
people  have  freed  themselves  from  the  domijj- 
ion  of  their  oppressors,  their  advantage  has  been 
only  temporary.  For  they  have  always  imme- 
diately set  about  to  build  up,  and  to  allow  the 
building  up,  of  a  new  system  of  exaction  to  take 
the  place  of  the  old  S3stems. 

We  see  now  that  exaction,  as  a  primary  cause, 
leads  to  wars,  first,  from  the  standpoint  of  re- 
lief from  the  consequences  of  exaction,  as  where 
people  advocate  war  for  the  sake  of  r  elief  from 
industrial  depression  and  hardtinies.  This 
sort  of  relief  we  have  explained  is  a  little  present 
gain  at  the  expense  of  impulse  in  the  divestment 
of  the  people,  the  frequency  of  panics  and  bitter- 
ness of  them. 

Secondly,  exaction  leads  to  war  for  the  furth- 
erance of  exaction, the  exactors  encouraging  war 
for  the  profit  there  is  in  the  business  to  them- 
selves. Looked  at  as  an  instrumentality  well 
calculated  to  accelerate  the  aggregation  of  the 
world's  wealth  in  their  own  hands  it  is  a  good 
^  thing  for  them.  In  reality,  however,  it  is  not  a 
good  thing  for  them,  since  stolen  gains  benefit 
nobody,  and  are  a  curse  to  everybody. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 77 

Exaction,  in  the  third  place,  leads  to  war  by 
impelling  to  revolt  against  it  when  it  exceeds 
common  endurance.  Warlike  revolt  of  a  people 
for  the  purpose  of  ridding  themselves  of  the  do- 
minion and  encroachments  of  exaction,  is  an 
exercise  of  pure  patriotism.  A  war  of  defense 
against  invaders  intent  upon  exacting  would  be 
of  the  same  kind.  Except  for  these  purposes,  I 
do  not  see  that  any  resort  to  war  could  be  char- 
acterized as  an  exercise  of  patriotism.  Liberty 
bought  of  war,  and  lost  again  through  failure  to 
provide  against  the  rise  of  new  exactors,  I  must 
claim,  however,  is  making  the  resort  to  war 
a  thing  of  vainness  and  folly. 

Aside  from  the  three  motives  based  upon 
exaction  here  given,  I  do  not  see  any  that  would 
provoke  war.  I  am  convinced,  therefore,  that 
without  exaction  war  would  be  a  relic.  Motives 
of  relief  would  be  absent,  because  no  oppression. 
Motives  of  gain  would  be  absent,  because  a\\ 
would  have  to  bear  alike  the  burdens  of  war,  and 
each  individual  would  have  to  submit  to  a  dead 
loss  of  time,  service  and  wealth.  Evidcntl}-  war 
which  produced  such  results  would  not  be  en- 
"■aired  in,  unless  it  were  a  case  of  resistance  of 
non-exactors,  against  the  invasions  of  those  per- 
petuating their  exacting  devices  and  bent  upon 
further  exaction. 


178 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


FINANCE    OF    WAR. 


It  may  not  be  inappropriate  here  to  touch  upon 
the  question  of  money  needs  of  war. 

A  free  people  would  be  expected  to  provide 
funds  for  the  carrying  on  of  war,  against  invading 
exactors,  say,  mainly  by  direct  taxation.  We 
premise,  first,  that  the  absence  of  exaction  would 
be  brought  about  by  fair  taxation.  Fair  tax- 
ation would  cause  each  to  contribute,  in  a  certain 
proportion  based  upon  wealth,  for  the  prosecution 
of  the  war.  It  would  also  cause  each  to  con- 
tribute in  the  same  proportion  for  the  payment 
of  a  war  debt.  Under  such  dispensation  a  large 
war  debt  could  not  be  created  unless  the  govern- 
ment remunerated  each  tax-payer  with  bonds 
equalling  the  amount  of  taxes  he  paid.  But  as 
to  tax  the  people  afterward  to  pay  for  these  bonds 
would  be  to  ask  each  person  to  pay  for  his  own 
bond,  we  can  readily  see  that  the  inhabitants 
would  prefer  to  dispense  with  the  issuing  of 
bonds.  Bonds  would  be  issued  to  those  who 
could  spare  more  means  to  aid  the  government 
than  their  proportionate  share  of  taxation  called 
for,  the  same  being  attracted  by  the  offer  of  the 
government  to  exchange  its  bonds,  running  on 
time  and  bearing  interest,  tor  those  means.  The 
amount  obtained  in  that  way,  however,  would 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  179 

not  suffice  for  the  creation  of  a  very  large  debt, 
since  fair  taxation  would  not  leave  much  that 
desired  such  investment. 

A  war  we  can  conceive  would  be  very  unpop- 
ular under  a  fair  system  of  taxation,  for  no 
people  could  see  any  advantage  in  having  to  give 
away  their  earnings  for  the  support  of  soldiers, 
without  any  chance  of  ever  getting  anything  in 
return  for  their  earnings.  It  would  be  excessive 
taxation  and  consumption  of  means,  with  nothing 
but  a  hole  in  their  resources  to  show  for  it.  A 
free  and  fair  dealing  people  would  never  have 
recourse  to  war  except  for  patriotic  defense. 
Such  people,  too,  would  be  very  difficult  of  sub- 
jugation. 

Would  more  money  be  required  by  a  free 
people  in  war  than  in  peace?  In  my  opinion  no 
more  would  be  needed.  Under  a  S3-stem  in 
which  no  surpluses  were  built  up,  in  which  all 
were  rewarded  according  to  their  earnings,  and 
all  earnings  were  required  to  reward  all;  in  which 
the  wants  of  all  were  free  to  amplif}',  and  con- 
sumption was  limited  only  by  the  power  to  pro- 
duce, the  activity  of  the  people  would  always 
be  at  high  tide. 

Consumption  and  production,  or  demand  and 
supply  being  equal,  the  conditions  would  not  be 
better  for  evolving  activity.  It  is  a  question 
whether  as  much  money   would  be  needed,  the 


l8o  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

increased  activity  of  production  being  over-bal- 
anced by  the  number  diverted  away  from  pro- 
duction. 

REGULATING  THE  CURRENCY. 

I  append  a  few  remarks  under  this  head.  The 
best  plan  of  regulating  the  volume  of  currency,  I 
think,  is  yet  to  be  discovered.  But  the  lack  of 
best  plan  of  managing  the  currency  is  not  the 
thing  that  is  hurting  us  now.  The  great  hurt 
consists  in  the  oretting  out  of  the  hands  of  earners 
into  the  hands  of  the  non-earners  the  money  that 
is.  When  we  have  a  system  of  fair  distribution 
of  earnings,  as  induced  by  free  competition,  the 
money  will  settle  where  it  belongs,  and  there  will 
be  no  complaints  to  make. 

My  belief  is  that  the  best  plan  of  present  pro- 
posing for  the  regulation  of  the  volume  of  cur- 
rency is  through  a  S3'stem  of  purchase  and  sale 
of  bonds. 

We  can  first  premise  that  the  government  will 
alwa3's  be  in  need  of  money,  not  only  for  routine 
expense  but  for  extraordinary  purposes,  as  harbor 
and  river  improvements,  public  buildings  and 
probably  the  conduct  of  wars. 

We  will  premise  next  that  the  government 
holds  itself  in  readiness  at  all  times  to  buy  bonds 
or  to  sell  bonds,  as  the  occasion  requires,  the  same 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  iSl 

bearing  an  annual  rate  of  interest  equal,  as  near 
as  can  be  found  out,  to  the  average  national  and 
natural  annual  increase  of  wealth.  To  satisfy  its 
money  needs  then,  the  government,  if  it  owe  for 
bonds,  will  pursue  one  course,  if  it  owe  for  no 
bonds,  will  pursue  another  course. 

Now,  when  people  held  bonds  against  the 
government,  the  indication  would  be  that  the 
money  in  circulation  sufBced  to  answer  the  de- 
mands of  commerce.  The  money  paid  better 
in  bonds  than  in  business.  Taxation,  therefore, 
should  be  resorted  to,  to  obtain  the  means  needed 
to  meet  governmental  expense. 

But  should  there  be  no  bonds  in  the  hands  of 
the  people  against  the  government,  the  indica- 
tion would  be  that  money  was  insufficient  for 
trade.  The  bonds  had  been  converted  into 
mone}',  because  more  could  be  made  through 
use  of  it  in  business  than  by  investment  of  it  in 
bonds.  In  this  case  the  duty  would  be  to  issue 
money  to  meet  government  expense,  and  to  keep 
on  issuing  until  bonds  were  sought  when  issue 
should  stop  and  taxation  begin.  The  taxation 
should  be  kept  up,  and  no  new  issue  made 
so  long  as  any  bonds  were  held  against  the  gov- 
ernment. 

The  underlying  principles  of  this  plan  and  that 
of  the  national  banking  plan  arc  the  same,  though 
there  are  some  incidents  joined  with  the  national 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I  §2 

banking  plan  that  are  not  to  be  approved.  The 
bonds  delivered  by  the  national  banks  to  the  gov- 
ernment should  be  looked  upon  as  consideration 
for  circulation  warranting  their  cancellation.  The 
banks  would  not  then  draw  double  interest  upon 
one  capital,  and  the  government  would  still  sustaiT=i 
the  same  relationship  to  these  banks  that  it  does 
now.  To  cancel  the  bonds  would  not  affect  the 
rate  of  interest  the  banks  would  charge,  since  it 
is  their  rule  to  charge  whatever  they  can  get.  If 
you  argue  that  more  are  tempted  into  the  bank- 
ing business,  the  answer  is,  that  double  interest 
tends  to  abnormal  increase  of  circulation.  Monev, 
to  be  kept  even  in  supply  with  the  need  of  it, 
should  be  rendered  no  more  remunerative  in 
loans  than  in  trade. 

The  plan  under  discussion  does  not  meditate 
the  issue  of  circulation  to  those  intent  upon 
the  banking  business  alone.  It  would  issue 
money  at  any  time  bondholders  preferred  to  ex- 
change their  bonds  for  money  at  par,  and  with- 
out question  of  what  use  was  to  be  made  of  the 
money. 

These  remarks  apply,  of  course,  only  to  the 
nominal  amount  of  bonds  that  would  play  the 
part  of  regulation  of  currency  volume.  While 
we  have  a  large  public  debt,  as  now,  no  bonds 
would  begin  to  play  that  role  until  bonds  came 
to  par  and  sought   conversion   faster  than  they 


1 8^  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

were  due.  Whenever  the  holders  of  our  large 
public  debt  preferred  the  money  at  par  for  their 
bonds  to  the  bonds  themselves  at  a  natural  rate 
of  interest,  then  it  would  be  safe  to  issue  mone}' 
in  exchange  for  them,  or  for  so  many  as  would 
seek  conversion.  When  they  did  not  seek  such 
conversion,  the  evidence  would  be  that  their 
worth  paid  better  in  bonds  than  in  trade,  and 
that  they  should  be  paid  off  by  taxation  as  fast 
as  they  became  due. 

Government  paper  issues  of  money  are  not 
available  for  settlement  of  balances  with  foreign 
nations,  for  the  reason  that  the  reigning  spirit  of 
exaction  renders  governments  unstable,  which 
character  is  transmitted  to  their  guarantees. 
The  nations  of  the  world  are  engaged  in  the 
work  of  ruining  one  another  and  in  ruining  them- 
selves. A  horoscope  cannot  be  cast,  therefore, 
in  one  decade  of  the  situation  of  nations  in  an- 
other decade.  Possibly  the  nation  that  confi- 
dently guarantees  its  series  of  legal  tenders  in 
one  period,  will,  in  another  period,  find  its  pre- 
rogatives set  aside  for  that  of  an  invader,  or 
through  or  in  consequence  of  the  machinations 
of  exactors  within.  Therefore,  for  use  in  trade 
with  foreign  nations,  a  commodity  having  an  in- 
trinsic value,  as  gold  and  silver,  becomes  a 
necessity.  Gold  and  silver  are  needed  in  bulk 
for  the  settlement  of  balances  with  nations:  but 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 84 

still,  to  tit  them  for  use  in  the  smaller  transactions 
within  a  nation,  they  need  to  be  divided  into 
pieces  of  given  weight,  size  and  purity,  and 
stamped,  each  piece  with  an  expressed  value  ap- 
proaching as  near  as  possible  to  its  intrinsic 
value.  "^ 

When  a  system  of  fair  distribution  will  have 
become  supreme  the  world  over,  and  govern- 
ments rendered  thereby  everlasting,  a  guaranteed 
paper  circulation  of  one  nation  will  be  good 
for  its  expressed  value  in  any  other  nation,  for 
any  purpose  it  was  the  function  for  money  to 
serve. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


WASTE  ON  HUMAN  CAPABILITIES. 

Amonof  the  conditions  that  must  exist  to 
evoke  the  fruitfullest  exercise  of  the  God-given 
powers  of  man  are  these  : 

1 .  The  greatest  freedom  in  choice  of  methods. 

2.  The  closest  interest  in  the  fruits  of  employ- 
ment. 

These  conditions  are  the  intimate  attributes 
of  ownership.  They  are  not  supported  so 
closely  by  any  other  relation  of  man  to  proper- 
ty. Ownership  is  essential  to  the  first  condition 
because  there  cannot  be  exemption  from  inter- 
ference without  complete  control,  and  complete 
control  is  incompatible  with  any  other  relation. 
A  man  exercises  his  own  will  in  recrard  to  such 
property  only  as  he  owns,  so  that  it  is  ownership 
alone  that  gives  man  liberty  to  perform  in  his 
own  way.  Ownership  of  capital  is  essential  to 
the  second  condition  because  that  provision 
alone  gives  the  performer  the  right  to  the  fruits 


1 86  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

of  his  performance  and  creates  the  highest  in- 
terest of  all  interests  namely,  the  interest  of  pos- 
session. Any  advantag-e  which  a  people  derive 
from  the  existence  of  either  of  these  conditions, 
then,  they  will  be  able  to  credit  to  ownership, 
because  ownership  must  precede  these  condi^ 
tions.  These  requisite  conditions  are  laid  down 
with  a  view  of  showing,  by  a  di-cussion  of  their 
merits,  how  unfair  distribution^  by  the  creation 
of  opposite  conditions,  causes  a  waste  of  human 
capabilities. 

We  can  see  that  people  are  benefitted  most 
where  provision  is  made  for  the  highest  possi- 
ble freedom  of  choice  of  methods,  the  first  at- 
tribute of  ownership,  because  they  then  profit 
from  the  exercise  and  application  of  the  infinite 
variet}-  of  resources  found  in  the  different  mem- 
bers of  their  number. 

Men's  talents,  we  know,  are  as  varied  as  the 
faces  of  men.  These  differences  were  designed 
to  enable  us  to  perceive  and  lay  hold  upon  the 
diversified  forces  of  nature.  If  it  were  not  so, 
and  our  minds  were  all  precisely  like  some  one 
man's  mind,  we  could  pursue  only  an  one  straight 
course  adapted  to  the  comprehension  of  that 
single  mind,  and  would  lose  all  other  of  nature's 
helps,  because  we  did  not  understand  them. 
Happily,  the  author  of  our  beings  has  seen  tit  to 
furnish  us  with  perceptions  as  varied  as  the  nat- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  187 

ural  objects  it  was  designed  we  should  stud)- 
and  solve  the  intricacies  of.  One  person  is  fitted 
to  excel  in  one  thing,  another  person  in  another 
thing.  A  useful  idea  that  would  not  dawn  upon  a 
certain  man's  brain  in  a  life-time  is  perceived  by 
another  in  an  instant.  The  devising  often  men 
will  readily  dissolve  difficulties  that  would  im- 
pede one  man  always,  because  his  devising 
capacity  was  limited  to  the  grasp  of  a  single 
mind.  In  any  piece  of  planning  two  heads  are 
better  than  one,  and,  in  the  same  line,  the  freest 
exercise  of  universal  talent  will  the  soonest 
bring  about  the  complete  mastery  of  man  over 
the  forces  of  nature.  To  provide  that  condition, 
then,  which  liberates  to  the  largest  extent  the 
countless  capacities  of  man,  mental  and  physi- 
cal, is  to  provide  for  the  most  rapid  development 
of  the  human  race. 

By  the  interest  of  possession  in  the  fruits  of 
toil,  the  second  condition  resulting  from  capital 
ownership,  the  people  profit  by  the  inducement 
of  that  prudence  of  management,  saving,  watch- 
fulness, care  and  modification  of  methods  to  suit 
peculiar  cases  which  a  man  extends  to  any  pursuit 
in  which  his  reward  depends  upon  the  yield  he 
can  produce  by  his  industry  and  care.  The  fruits 
of  his  labor  being  his  own,  he  is  interested  in 
getting  the  largest  return  possible,  and  he  wilh 
from  the  very  nature    of   things,  create  a  much 


l88  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

greater  return  than  can  be  hoped  for  from  one 
who  looks  for  compensation  in  salary  or  wages 
only. 

Seeing  then  that  ownership  calls  for  the  wisest 
exertions  and  best  devising  expedients  in  man  we 
become  thorougl}'  convinced  that  the  productive 
appliances  of  a  people  will  be  perfected  in  the 
most  effective  way,  by  keeping  in  vogue  a  system 
which  invokes  to  the  highest  extent  the  facilities 
for  obtainment  by  men  of  proprietary  interests  in 
their  vocations. 

But  we  have  said  that  unfair  distribution  causes 
a  waste  of  human  capabilities.  How?  By  con- 
version into  few  hands  of  extravagant  possessory 
interests,  thus  reducing  the  proprietary  class  to 
the  minimum  number.  By  creating  a  small  class 
of  millionaire  owners  on  the  one  hand,  and  a  large 
class  of  propertyless  employes  on  the  other,  both 
of  whom  have  their  efficienciesimpaired  by  the 
obstructions  attending  their  situations. 

First,  the  owners  of  immense  establishments 
can  give  only  general  and  skipping  attention  to 
the  details  of  affairs,  leaving  the  real  management 
and  performances  of  their  businesses  to  others, 
under  their  employ.  This  is  operating  second 
handed,  which  is  a  very  disadvantageous  mode. 
It  is  impossible  to  get  men  to  take  the  same  con- 
cern in  the  welfare  of  others'  interests  that  the}' 
will  take  in  their  own.     The  very  natures  of  men 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  1 89 

forbid  the  practice  of  the  minutest  productive 
economy  when  the  fruits  of  toil  do  not  become 
their  own,  and  as  the  owners  of  immense  estab- 
Hshments  cannot  themselves  give  attention  to 
all  of  the  innumerable  details,  or  in  many  cases  to 
any  of  the  details,  upon  which  the  fruitfulness  of 
operations  depend,  there  follows  inevitable  waste 
and  loss.  The  losses  occasioned  by  want  of 
strictest  care  here,  and  the  allowance  of  a  small 
waste  there,  and  the  failure  to  create  to  the  utmost 
capacity  ever}^  where,  things  that  would  be  pre- 
vented by  a  proprietor  having  a  smaller  concern 
over  which  he  could  give  completer  supervision, 
go  to  make  up  an  immense  aggregate  to  be  de- 
ducted  from  what  might  be  the  real  produce  of 
employed  labor  and  capital. 

While  proprietors  of  vast  concerns  cannot  fa- 
miliarize themselves  with  their  businesses  suf- 
ficiently well  to  fit  them  to  formulate  the  best 
plans  for  the  general,  and  specifically  the  depart- 
mental, conduct  of  them,  still  by  virtue  of  their 
authority  as  owners,  all  orders  must  emanate  from 
them.  Those  under  them,  therefore,  have  no 
higher  powers  than  that  of  executives  and  ser- 
vants. The  superintendents  and  men  in  emplo}' 
have  authority  to  execute  only  such  plans  as  are 
furnished  to  them  ready  made.  They  are 
without  power  to  adopt  the  better  methods  which 
their   greater   familiarity   with  the  businesses  in 


190  UNFAIR   DISTRIBUTION. 

hand  and  practice  would  enable  them  to  prescribe. 
From  this  ensues  more  waste — a  waste  of  the 
superior  knowledge  and  skill  which  the  super- 
intendent and  others  obtain  from  close  contact  and 
intimate  experience  with  the  businesses  in  hand, 
and  from  constant  observation  of  the  phenomena^ 
rules,  causes  and  effects  connective  therewith. 
Though  they  may  be  animated  b}^  a  concientious 
desire  to  expend  their  knowledge  and  skill  for 
the  best  interests  of  their  employers,  yet  are  they 
bound  by  master's  rules  and  subjected  to  the  con- 
servatism, and  opposition  to  new  methods,  which 
characterize  the  masters  as  a  class.  It  is  well- 
known  that  useful  inventions  and  improvements 
seldom  emanate  from  large  capitalists,  and  that  it 
requires  the  most  strenuous  efforts  by  the  authors 
of  the  best  appliances  to  get  them  generally 
adopted.  The  direct  managers  are  the  quickest 
to  discover  the  advantages  in  improvements  and 
the  defects  in  existing  things,  but  being  without 
the  power  which  ownership  confers,  that  is  the 
power  to  enforce  the  adoption  or  discharge  of 
measures  and  appliances  according  as  they  see 
that  they  will  beneficially  or  do  injuriously  effect 
the  concerns  in  charge,  the}'  are  often  compelled 
to  carry  out  modes  and  policies  which  their  better 
grounded  judgments  plainly  tell  them  are  far 
from  being  the  best  that  could  be  employed. 
This  superiority  of  ability  to  control,  direct  and 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I9I 

adopt  becomes  so  much  wasted,  so  much  of 
diversified  and  practical  talent  shut  off  from 
utilization  in  progress,  improvement  and  cheap- 
ening of  production. 

Again,  self-interest  constructs  policies  to  suit 
the  situations  of  men.  It  is  polic}-  for  the  super- 
intendent to  preserve  the  good  esteem  of  the 
proprietor  who  engages  him,  as  likewise  it  is 
policy  to  maintain  the  good  will  of  the  men  over 
whom  he  exercises  control.  Good  will  between 
the  men  and  superintendent  fills  the  proprietor 
with  an  exalted  idea  of  the  superintendent's  fit- 
ness for  the  position  he  occupies.  This  high  idea 
protects  the  superintendent  in  the  enjoyment  of 
his  position  and  salary,  the  things  of  ruling  mo- 
ment to  him.  But  the  good  relationship  between 
superintendent  and  men  may  depend  upon  a 
series  of  favoritisms  toward  the  latter  which  is 
an^'thing  but  to  the  interests  of  the  proprietor. 

Again,  the  superintendent  may  find  it  to  his  ad- 
vantage to  flatter  his  master  upon  the  latter's  exer- 
cise of  sound  judgment  where  there  has  been  plainly 
unsoundness  of  judgment,  and  refrain  from  speak- 
ing the  blunt  truth  in  the  matter.  By  so  doing 
he  attaches  himself  more  firmly  to  the  good  will 
of  a  vain  employer  and  profits  thereby;  and 
while  it  is  certain  such  conduct  is  not  for  the 
best  interests  of  the  employer,  it  serves  to  pro- 
mote the   interests  of  the  superintendent;  it  an- 


192  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

swers  his  needs,  and  is  but  an  exhibition  of  a 
natural  motive. 

Without  multipl3'ing  examples,  I  think  I  have 
shown  that  that  of  a  superintendent's  authorit}', 
privileges  and  interest  being  foreign  to  those  of  a 
proprietor's,  he  lacks  the  proprietor's  opportmu.- 
ties  for  the  exercise  of  that  knowledge  and  ac- 
quired skin,  and  he  lacks  the  proprietor's  incen- 
tives for  the  exercise  of  that  prudence,  saving, 
care  and  attention  to  details  which  are  so  enrich- 
ing, when  exercised,  in  results.  In  these  facts 
are  found  objections  to  the  aggregation  of  indus- 
tries into  immense  wholes  in  ownership  of  a  few. 

Extending  to  the  common  workmen  our  in- 
quiries, we  still  fail  to  find  good  in  a  S3'stem 
which  increases  beyond  necessity  the  list  of 
people  deprived  of  all  the  interests  and  incentives 
which  give  inspiration  and  ambition  to  owners. 
We  are  onh^  multiplying  those  who  are  interested 
rather  in  saving:  their  strenofth  and  muscle  than 
in  putting  forth  extra  exertions  in  the  creation 
of  supply. 

Coupled  with  the  drawbacks  of  restraint  and 
dis-interest  are  the  inefficiencies  resulting  from 
weakness  of  mind  and  body.  The  meagre  wages 
which  the  monopolists  can  compel  men  to  ac- 
cept shuts  them  off  from  schools,  churches  and 
all  the  means  of  enlightenment  of  mind.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  dwell  upon  the  inferiority  to  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I03 

educated,  of  the  ignorant  and  dense-minded,  as 
producers  and  earners.  Statistics,  observation 
and  common  sense  satisfy  us  on  that  point.  As 
to  physical  worth,  the  deprivations  of  body  which 
under-paid  employes  are  made  to  endure  from 
lack  of  nutritious  food,  warm  clothing,  comforta- 
ble houses,  and  the  overwork  they  are  subjected 
to,  are  so  health -destroying  as  to  render  it  uncom- 
mon to  find  a  perfectly  robust  person  of  middle 
age  among  them.  Producing  inefficiency  in  such 
men  it  needs  no  ariiument  to  establish.  It  is 
onl}'  necessary  to  say  that  these  are  some  more 
of  the  crippling  agencies  born  of  monopolies,  and 
that  the}'  greath'  increase  the  cost  of  produc- 
tion; so  much  so  that  the  monopolies  could  not  be 
made  self-sustaining  if  the  destruction  of  compe- 
tition did  not  give  them  license  to  rob  the  public 
indefinitely. 

The  common  belief  is  that  the  more  capital 
there  is  engaged  in  a  single  industr}',  the  cheaper 
the  production  in  that  industry.  But  thei^e  is 
error  in  this.  The  influx  of  capital  into  an  in- 
dustry acts  as  a  cheapener,  until  the  amount  of 
sufficiency  is  reached;  further, it  acts  to  the  con- 
trary. Adequacy  of  capital,  to  the  degree  that 
it  gives  into  an  enterprise  the  best  form  of  buil- 
dings, the  most  adaptible  machinery  and  tools^ 
and  operating  fund  to  correspond,  is  essential  to 
cheap  production.     But  where   there  is  enough. 


194 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


efficiency  is  marred  by  the  addition  of  more. 
The  manufacture  of  a  supply  of  anything  being 
divided  among  a  number  of  independent  manu- 
facturers, possessed  each  with  all  the  modern  fa- 
cilities for  doing  his  work,  the  wares  will  be 
turned  out  upon  the  lowest  basis  of  cost.  Becaus'fe 
there  will  be  a  large  number  of  interested  pro- 
prietors engaged  in  directl}'  overseeing  and  care- 
fully watching  every  detail  in  order  to  secure  the 
greatest  economy  in  the  production  of  their  arti- 
cles. Because  the  proprietors  can  bestow  upon 
their  business  their  own  time  and  dispense  with 
dependence  upon  salaried  sub-masters  to  half- 
conduct  businesses  for  them.  Because  direct 
contact  with  their  men,  as  well  as  the  better  re- 
muneration they  will  have  to  pay  their  men  on 
account  of  the  demand  for  labor  b}'  many  other 
employers,  will  secure  the  earnest  effort,  vigor- 
ous movement,  intelligent  action  and  well-wishes 
of  their  employes.  Because  the  employes  them- 
selves will  be  thrifty  stockholders  in  the  con- 
cerns^ and  will  have  all  the  interest  in  the  success 
of  the  concerns  that  ownership  gives. 

Conversely,  when  a  set  of  persons  have  plied 
the  wrecking  and  consolidating  processes  to 
extinguish  the  separateness  in  entity  of  busi- 
nesses and  industries,  and  have  succeeded  in 
merging  all  smaller  concerns  into  a  few  enor- 
mous ones,  they  have  originated  a  series  of  cum- 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  I95 

brances,  unwieldinesses  and  perplexities  that  ren- 
der the  most  economical  production  impossible. 
Even  could  there  be  fair  distribution  in  connec- 
tion with  consolidated  production,  the  annual 
out-put  from  nature  would  be  immensely  short  of 
possibilities. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


COMBINATIONS    OF    CAPITAL,  JUSTIFIABLE 
AND    UNJUSTIFIABLE. 


Combinations  of  capital  into  single  enterprises 
are  occasioned  by  different  motives  in  men. 
These  motives  may  be  justifiable  or  unjustifiable. 
We  may  suppose  an  instance  of  justifiable  com- 
bination. 

A  party  of  persons  conclude  that  it  would  be 
a  paying  investment  to  establish  a  shoe  factory 
in  the  western  town  of  Owago.  The  facts 
which  they  have  taken  into  consideration  are 
these : 

First.  Shoes  can  be  made  cheaper  and  better 
by  machinery  than  by  hand. 

Second.  The  factory  would  be  near  to  the 
raw  material  of  cattle  hides  and  others  stuffs,  and 
near  the  people  who  should  want  the  shoes. 

Third.  A  factory  that  was  most  perfectly 
equipped,  containing  neither  less  capital  than  was 
necessary  for  proper  canying  on  of  the  business, 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  I97 

or  such  an  excess  as  to  make  it  cumbersome  and 
costly  to  manage,  could  turn  out  shoes  upon  the 
lowest  basis  of  cost. 

Fourth.  Cheap  shoes  would  make  many  sales, 
man}'  sales  would  make  many  margins,  man}- 
margins  would  make  big  profits. 

These  facts,  we  will  suppose,  have  caused  the 
persons  in  question  to  decide  to  make  the  in- 
vestment. But  the  making  of  the  investment  is 
a  combination  of  capital,  as  common  under- 
standino-  oroes.  A  considerable  sum  of  value  is 
put  into  a  single  enterprise.  It  requires,  to  erect 
a  building  of  suitable  dimensions,  and  to  place  in 
it  a  complete  outfit  of  machinery  and  tools,  and 
to  stock  it  with  a  due  amount  of  leather  and  other 
material,  and  to  make  provision  for  a  sufficient 
quantity  of  surplus  or  operating  fund,  and  to  keep 
these  all  up  to  the  proper  standard,  an  estimated 
capital  of,  say,  $50,000.  This  is  a  combination 
of  capital,  and  similar  to  thousands  of  combinations 
of  capital  existing  everywhere. 

But,  what  fault  can  be  found  with  this  combi- 
nation,^ None  whatever.  Why  not.^  Because 
the  founders  have  done  nothing  in  the  establish- 
ment of  this  industry,  but  what  is  a  benefit  to  the 
rest  of  the  community  and  to  themselves.  They 
have  arranged  to  furnish  to  the  community 
cheaper  shoes  than  could  be  furnished  before. 
They  save  a   big  share  of  the  cost  of  all  hand- 


198  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

work  by  emplo3-ment  of  labor-saving  machinery. 
They  save  the  cost  of  transporting  raw  hides 
away  and  finished  shoes  back  again,  over  thousands 
of  miles  of  railway.  They  have  established  a 
factory  that  can  produce  cheaper  than  one  which 
contains  more  or  less  capital.  These  various  sa\'-- 
ings  reflect  to  the  advantage  of  all.  The  manu- 
facturers have  maximum  profit  upon  capital,  at 
the  same  time  that  the  people  have  shoes  at  min- 
imum cost.  Who,  therefore,  can  find  fault  with 
a  combination  backed  b}'  such  motives  as  gov- 
erned in  the  formation  of  this  supposable  one. 

If  the  same  motives  controlled  all  parties  en- 
gao^ed  in  the  manufacture  of  shoes,  what  would 
we  see  in  industrialism  as  a  result.?  Shoemakino- 
establishments  would  be  distributed  reo-ularlv 
over  the  country  in  the  form  of  greatest  per- 
fection of  magnitude,  neither  too  large  or  too 
small  as  respects  capital  contained,  each  supplying 
the  territory  within  its  own  range.  This  could 
not  but  be,  if  the  same  motives  controlled  as  did 
in  the  case  just  described. 

Let  us  now  give  attention  to  what  would  be  an 
unjustifiable  combination  or  one  governed  b}'  un- 
justifiable motives. 

Instead  of  shoemaking  establishments  being 
distributed  here  and  there  throughout  the  country 
in  the  form  of  smaller  but  complete  concerns,  we 
may   find   them   existing:   as  immense  establish- 


JNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


199 


ments  upon  few  points  of  the  continent,  and  all 
under  a  single  management,  agreement  or  pool. 
Various  may  have  been  the  modes  by  which  the 
shoe  manufacturers  got  themselves  into  this  latter 
form  of  combination.       There  may  have  been  a 
general  agreement  among  all   pre-existing  inde- 
pendent manufacturers  to  thus  consolidate.     Or, 
the  stronger  pre-existing  manufacturers  may  have 
joined  together  and  bought  out  the  weaker  man- 
ufacturers, or  crushed  them  out    if   they  refused 
to  sell  out,  and   then   formed  their  combination. 
Or,  those  who  first  started  into  the  business,  may 
have,  by  means  of  menacing  new  factories  with 
railroad  discrimination,  or  under  priced  sales  in 
the  vicinities  where  the  latter  should  start,  kept 
new  factories  from  ever  coming  into  existence. 
Whatever  has  been  the  mode  employed  for  get- 
ting the  shoe  industry  under  control  of  a  very  few 
persons,  we  will  suppose  that  a  very  few  persons 
have   combined  to  get  the  shoe  industry  under 
their  control. 

The  question  then  arises,  what  has  been  the 
motive  of  parties  who  have  engaged  in  this  sort 
of  combination  ?  It  could  not  have  been  to  let 
the  people  have  cheaper  shoes  for  they  have  done 
that  which  enhances  the  cost  of  getting  shoes 
into  the  possession  of  the  people.  By  establishing 
factories  at  but  few  points,  probably  upon  one 
side  of  the  continent,    they  have   placed  a  long 


200  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

distance  between  themselves  and  the  bulk  of  their 
raw  material,  and  between  themselves  and  the 
majority  of  those  who  are  to  be  the  patrons  for 
their  wares.  They  have  also  aggregated  the  in- 
dustries into  a  few  enormous  or  unwieldy  concerns 
which  cannot,  b}^  any  means,  produce  shoes  at^ 
the  lowest  possible  cost  at  which  shoes  can  be 
made.  What  can  be  the  motive,  then,  of  those 
who  have  combined  to  monopolize  the  shoe  in- 
dustry. The  motive  cannot  be  else  than  a  motive 
to  profit  at  the  expense  of  the  public.  Those  who 
formed  the  combination  cannot  have  formed  it 
for  any  other  purpose  than  to  enable  them  to 
overcharge  and  underpay  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
overcome  the  extra  cost  of  making  and  trans- 
portation and  yet  to  leave  them  a  greater  profit 
than  was  allowed  without  a  monopolizing  com- 
bination. A  fortune  at  the  expense  of  the  world 
must  have  been  the  controlling  thought  with 
them. 

There  has  now  been  described  two  forms  of 
combination.  One  was  a  concentration  of  capital 
for  the  purpose  of  having  enough  under  a  single 
management  to  form  a  complete  shoe  factory. 
The  motive  was  to  gain  greater  profit,  not  by 
adding  to  the  price  of  shoes,  but  by  saving  upon 
the  cost  of  making  and  upon  the  cost  of  trans- 
portation. The  other  was  a  concentration  of 
capital  for  the  purpose  of  getting   all  the  shoe 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  20I 

industries  under  one  or  a  ver}'  few  managements. 
The  motive  was  to  gain  greater  profit,  not  by 
saving  in  the  cost  of  supplying  shoes,  but  b}'  set- 
ting a  fictitious  advance  upon  the  price  of  shoes 
and  forcing  the  people  to  pay  it.  My  selection 
of  the  shoe  industry  is  not  to  be  interpreted  as 
signifying  that  the  shoe  manufactories  of  the 
country  consist  of  the  one  or  the  other  forms  of 
combination.  That  industry  has  been  selected 
for  mere  illustration's  sake. 

The  first  form  of  combination,  I  call  a  justifiable 
combination,  and  claim  that  it  consists  of  a  due 
and  beneficent  concentration  of  capital.  The 
second  I  call  an  unjustifiable  combination,  and 
claim  that  it  consists  of  an  overdue  and  injurious 
concentration  of  capital. 

The  first  form  of  combination  I  say  is  right, 
the  second  form  of  combination  I  sa}'  is  wrong. 

B}'  right,  I  mean  that  which  conduces  to  the 
long-living,  comfort  and  enjo3'ment  of  man.  By 
wrong,  I  mean  that  which  conduces  to  the  con- 
trar}'. 

Now,  I  ask,  what  do  we  work  for  ?  In  order 
that  we  may  have  those  things  which  arc  neces- 
sary to  our  long-living,  comfort  and  happiness, 
or,  in  short,  welfare.  Then  the  more  we  can 
produce  with  a  given  amount  of  energy  and  ex- 
penditure the  better.  That  being  so,  a  combi- 
nation that,  like  the  first  one   described,  gives  us 


202  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

cheaper  goods  than  could  be  given  to  us  without 
it,  is  a  combination  in  the  interest  of  risht.  The 
other  combination  is  in  the  interest  of  wrons". 

We  have  now  dealt  with  two  kinds  of  combi- 
nations, under  the  designations  of  justifiable  and 
unjustifiable.  These  complete  the  list  of  combi- 
nations formed  with  a  view  to  profit.  They  em- 
brace one  more,  however,  than  is  commonly 
conceived  to  be.  It  is  a  common  thought  that 
all  aggregations  of  wealth  are  in  principle  and 
underlying  motives  identical.  This  is  an  error, 
and  one  which  I  take  to  be  a  very  grave  one,  for 
I  believe  it  to  be  the  cause  of  so  man}'  being 
unwilling  to  take  strong  issue  against  monopolies, 
at  the  same  time  that  they  admit  that  monopolies 
are  the  foundation  ot  many  serious  evils.  They 
imagine  that  a  contest  against  monopol}'  is  a 
contest  against  concentration  of  capital  in  ever}- 
form,  and  perceiving  the  benefits  of  justifiable 
concentration  they  refrain  from  striking  a  blow 
at  any  for  fear  of  doing  harm  to  all. 

But  the  error  is  a  thing  of  thought.  There  is 
as  much  difference  between  a  combination  formed 
for  the  purpose  of  adequacy  of  capital  in  a  par- 
ticular trade,  and  one  formed  for  the  purpose  of 
monopolizing  an  entire  trade,  as  there  is  between 
daylight  and  darkness.  There  is  no  parallel 
between  an  independent  company  of  shoe  manu- 
facturers, doing  business  in  Owago,  in  competition 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


203 


with  other  shoe  manufacturers  in  other  places, 
and  a  combination  composed  of  all  the  shoe  man- 
ufacturers in  the  United  States.  Their  modes 
of  locating,  operating,  dealing,  attitude  toward 
the  public,  and  attendant  effects  are  diametrically 
opposed  to  each  other. 

A  justifiable  combination  is  one  which  cheap- 
ens production  and  gives  more  to  be  distributed 
into  society  than  can  be  procured  in  any  other 
way.  It  is  a  combination  which  has  no  advan- 
tage over  the  public,  and  therefor  must  deal 
with  the  public  upon  the  same  terms,  as  regards 
privileges  and  restraint,  that  the  public  deals 
with  it.  It  is  a  combination  which  makes  the 
same  rate  of  profit  upon  the  unit  of  energy  and 
capital  employed  that  every  other  business 
makes,  and  therefore  gains  nothing  which  it 
cannot  itself  use,  and  will  not  let  others  use.  It 
is  a  combination  that  appears  or  dissolves  as 
supply  and  demand  dictate,  and  does  not  dis- 
tort production  and  enterprise  out  of  all  harmony 
with  salient  needs.  It  is  a  combination  that  has 
no  selfish  designs  against  the  public  whatever, 
but  seeks  only  to  get  capital  into  the  best  pay- 
ing forms  after  the  example  of  our  ordinary 
tradesmen,  manufacturers  and  producers, pursu- 
ing their  vocations  all  around  us. 

An  unjustifiable  combination,  on  the  other 
hand,   enhances  first  cost  of  goo  ds,  holds  the 


204  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

public  by  the  throat  and  dictates  to  the  rest  of  the 
world.  It  denies  the  general  public  a  good  living 
after  they  have  earned  it,  and  piles  up  products 
to  mould,  rust  and  spoil.  It  wastes  capital  in 
mammoth  investments  that  are  only  half  needed, 
and  forces  the  people  to  shift  and  half-do  witK 
constant  lack  of  means.  It  keeps  a  million  of 
men  constantly  idle,  divests  the  common  people 
of  their  homesteads,  and  sends  the  nation  whir- 
ring along  towards  destruction. 

The  nature  and  doings  of  these  two  forms  of 
combination  are  so  entirel}'  unlike  that  they  can- 
not exist  together.  While  four  men  control  the 
railroads  of  the  nation,  there  cannot  be  a  hun- 
dred or  more  different  railroad  companies  doing 
business  in  competition  with  one  another,  and 
working  out  the  prosperity  of  themselves  and 
the  people.  While  the  woolen  industry  is  held 
in  the  hands  of  a  few  parties  in  the  east,  there 
cannot  flourish  woolen  factories  in  the  vicinities 
where  both  the  wool  could  be  erown  and  the 
woolens  sold.  While  there  is  a  coal  monopoly 
in  the  city  of  Pittsburgh,  Kansas,  there  can  be 
no  flourishing  mines  at  Columbus,  Hollowell, 
Oswego  and  other  places  along  the  coal  belt. 

Now,  if  I  am  right  in  what  I  have  gone  over, 
we  are  brought  to  the  question  of  a  choice. 
"  Which  shall  it  be,-'  is  the  question.  Shall  it  be 
industries  in  the  form  of  monopoly  or  shall  it  be 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  205 

the  extinction  of  such  form,  and  in  Heu  thereof, 
industries  of  adequate  size  and  conducted  in  com- 
petition with  one  another.  Blot  out  the  form  of 
monopol}',  and  you  have  the  other.  Have  the 
form  of  monopoly  and  the  other  is  blotted  out. 
Blot  out  the  form  of  monopoly  and  you  are  rid 
of  its  influences.  Have  the  form  of  monopoly  and 
vou  cannot  avoid  its  influences.  Blot  out  the 
form  of  monopoly  and  you  rid  society  of  a  curse. 
Have  the  form  of  monopoly  and  3'ou  have  some- 
thing there  is  no  necessity  for  whatever. 

Some  may  imagine  that  the  destruction  of  the 
form  of  monopoly  is  the  destruction  of  an  industry 
itself.  But  that  is  merely  an  error  of  the  mind. 
Capital  contained  in  the  form  of  monopolies  could 
no  more  be  obliterated  than  the  earth  could  be 
sent  turning  backward.  The  monopolists  will 
keep  their  capital  as  they  have  a  right  to  do,  but 
they  will  never  cease  to  use  it  as  monopolists  do 
while  they  are  allowed  to  hold  it  in  the  form  of 
monopolies. 

We  hold  to  these  conclusions: 

Adequate  aggregations  of  capital  into  enter- 
prises are  necessary  to  cheapest  cost  of  production 
and  exchange.  They  and  free  competition  go 
together,  are  mutually  promotive  and  are  es- 
sential to  the  welfare  of  society. 

Consolidated  aggregations,  comprising  all  the 
industries  of  a  class  into  the  form  of  a  monopoly, 


2o5  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

fail  to  possess  the  advantages  of  adequate  aggre- 
gations, while  they  lead  to  all  the  enormous  evils 
of  which  society  makes  complaint. 

Where  there  is  aggregation  into  the  form  of 
monopoly,  there  cannot  be  adequate  aggregations 
and  free  competition.  The  direct  contrary  of 
this  is  true. 

Fair  taxation  will  cause  monopolied  aggre- 
gations to  yield  to  the  ascendency  of  adequate 
aggregations  and  free  competition. 

Fair  taxation  is  the  true  remedy  for  the  great 
evils  which  have  the  monopoly  of  industries  as 
their  cause. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


COMMONPLACE  FALLACIES. 

I  desire  in  this  chapter  to  bring  together  some 
thoughts  that  are  of  a  sundried  and  therefore 
disconnected  character. 

A  common  mode  of  raising  money  for  carry- 
ing on  vast  enterprises  Hke  the  building  of  rail- 
roads, bridges,  waterworks  and  so  forth,  is 
through  the  issue  and  sale  of  bonds  and  stocks. 
It  is  a  rule  to  go  to  the  large  capitalists,  congre- 
gated usually  about  the  money  centers,  to  affect 
the  exchanges.  The  purchase  of  securities  by 
the  capitalists  does  not  imply  that  they  have 
undertaken  to  execute,  or  have  led  in  any  way 
to  the  origination  of  the  enterprises  their  money 
is  to  be  expended  upon.  They  may  have  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  practical  operation  of  carry- 
ing on  the  works;  may  never  have  known  of 
their  contemplated  existence  until  sought  to  in- 
vest in  the  securities  of  the  concerns. 

The  point  I  desire  to  draw  especial  attention 


2o8  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

to  is,  that  the  large  capitalists  are  appealed  to 
invariably,  or  almost  invariably,  whenever  mon- 
ied  means  for  the  prosecution  of  enterprises  are 
soucrht  to  be  evolved  out  of  the  crude  or  ina- 
daptible  forms  of  stocks  or  bonds,  based  in  the 
ordinary  ways.  It  is  a  custom  to  go  to  the  great 
capitalists  and  money  centers  to  get  securities 
exchanged  for  working  funds  ;  and  the  custom 
is  so  common  that  it  does  not  occur  to  many 
that  that  is  any  other  than  an  unalterable  mode 
of  procedure.  I  think  that  very  many  men 
talked  to  upon  the  subject  will  hold  that  this 
practice  is  a  necessary  and  unchangable  one. 

These  same  persons  believe  also  that  wecould 
not  have  great  and  costly  improvements  if  there 
were  no  places  where  money  was  found  in  large 
collective  quantities.  In  fact  they  think  that  the 
massing  of  wealth  in  large  quantities  into  single 
hands,  is  what  inspires  large  improvements  ; 
that  the  latter  would  neither  be  probable  or  pos- 
sible if  there  were  no  large  capitalists  to  origin- 
ate and  encourage  them  for  the  purpose  of  get- 
tine  their  funds  into  investment. 

Such  views  can  only  lead  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  amassing  of  the  surplus  wealth  of  the 
country  into  few  hands  is  desirable,  or  else  that 
great  and  expensive  improvements  had  best  be 
entirely  dispensed  with. 

But  such  views  can  only  be  classed  as  misap- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  209 

prehensions.  When  persons  have  Imbued 
themselves  with  the  idea  that  great  aggregated 
monied  possessions  are  the  originating  agents 
or  prerequisites  of  great  performances,  the}'  have 
failed  to  ground  themselves  upon  genuine  facts. 
They  have  failed,  in  the  first  place,  to  credit 
great  and  expensive  performances  to  their  gen- 
uine authorships,  viz:  the  demand  for  them.  In 
the  second  place,  they  have  failed  to  distinguish 
between  funds  asrsfreofated  and  belonijino-  to 
sinorle  owners,  and  those  aofgrrecrated  for  tie 
purpose  of  prosecuting  enterprises.  It  is 
necessary  to  have  large  funds  at  hand  to  draw 
upon  to  meet  the  expenses  of  great  enter- 
prises, but  it  is  not  necessary  for  them  to 
pre-exist  in  great  bulk  in  single  hands  before 
they  can  be  obtained. 

A  ready  fund  is  evolved  out  of  a  crude  fund, 
like  grants,  stocks,  bonds  and  so  forth,  by  sales 
of  and  loans  upon  this  crude  fund.  That  the 
sales  and  loans  are  usuall}'  or  invariabl}'  made  at 
the  monc}'  centers  is  only  an  incident  of  circum- 
stances and  not  an  unalterable  mode  of  procedure. 
When  it  is  understood  why  it  is  that  the  money 
is  concentrated  in  a  few  hands,  it  will  then  be 
made  plain  why  application  is  made  to  the  few- 
rich  invariably  to  get  funds  for  purpose  of  push- 
ing forward  improvements. 

If  the  gain-exactors  had  not  become  unjustly 


2IO  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

possessed  of  the  people's  surpluses  they  would  not- 
be  the  sole  owners  of  unfixed  or  investment 
seeking  capital.  If  the  people  were  allowed  to 
keep  what  was  justly  theirs,  they  would  have 
surpluses  to  invest  in  profit  bearing  securities. 
Under  a  fair  system  of  distribution, great  improve- 
ments would  be  developed  as  under  the  present 
system,  and  large  sums  of  mone}"  would  be  raised 
to  meet  expenditures,  as  now  is  done,  but  these 
sums  of  mone}'  would  not  be  obtained  from  rich 
capitalists  alone.  All  classes  would  contribute. 
All  sorts  of  people  from  the  richest  down  to  the 
least  well-to-do,  would  have  means  to  spare,  and 
investment  would  be  general,  and  the  fruits  of 
investment  would  be  distributed  among  myriads 
of  owners,  ranging  from  large  to  small,  and  fol- 
lowing all  kinds  of  pursuits,  and  living  every- 
where. 

An  illustration  will  not  be  out  of  place.  A 
railroad  becomes  a  necessity  somewhere,  any- 
where, to  the  extent  of  provoking  a  resolve  that 
it  shall  be  built.  Preliminaries  are  gone  through 
with,  plans  are  devised  and  executed,  and  in  due 
course  of  time  all  is  in  readiness  for  the  work 
proper  of  building  to  begin.  One  of  the  incidents 
helping  to  compose  the  whole  round  of  activitives 
necessary  to  execute  the  work,  is  the  flow  of  un- 
fixed capital^nto  the  enterprise  for  investment. 
If  the  people  needing  the  road  have  not  been  im- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  211 

poverished  b}'  the  promoters  of  unfair  distri- 
bution, they  will  be  able  to  advance  funds  for  the 
construction  of  the  road.  But  if  they  have  been 
despoiled  of  their  surplus  wealth  by  the  exactors, 
the  latter  will  become  the  owners  of  the  stocks, 
bonds  and  gifts,  by  virtue  of  having  been  the  only 
parties  able  to  advance  funds  for  the  construction 
and  equipment  of  the  road.  But  whatever  be 
the  forms  in  which  the  ready  capital  exists, 
whether  in  myriads  of  moderate  surpluses  in  the 
hands  of  the  earners  of  it,  or  in  consolidated  ag- 
gregations in  the  hands  of  the  despoilers  of  the 
people,  it  will  go  into  the  enterprise,  because  the 
enterprise  attracts  it.  It  is  the  essence  and  na- 
ture of  money  to  take  unto  itself  Wings,  as  it  were, 
and  wend  its  wa}',  in  large  or  small  quantities  as 
it  may  happen  to  exist,  to  those  quarters  where 
it  is  most  wanted,  because  it  there  serves  its 
masters  best  b}^  securing  for  them  the  greatest 
returns.  I  write  this  to  dissolve  an  erroneous  and 
mischievous  impression  many  harbor  in  regard 
to  the  way  money  must  be  raised  for  the  exe- 
cution of  costly  enterprises. 

There  is  no  reason,  except  unfair  distribution, 
why  every  community  should  not  furnish  the 
funds  for  the  construction  and  ownership  of  all 
its  own  enterprises,  big  and  little,  private  and 
public,  railroad  and  manufacturing.  Guarantee 
the  people  in  common  a  fair  hold  upon  their  ac. 


212  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

quisitions,  and  communities  would  take  care  of 
their  own  enterprises  in  a  manner  that  would 
show  an  even  development  of  the  country,  home 
ownerships,  home  manufactures,  and  the  general 
enrichment  of  all.  Autocracy  of  wealth  is  not 
natural,  it  is  artificial.  Outside  ownership  is  not 
natural,  it  is  artificial. 

Manufacturers,  of  the  present  da}',  impose  the 
burden  of  racing  materials  across  the  continent 
and  back  again,  for  change  from  raw  articles  to 
finished  ones,  when  the  conversion  could  have 
been  managed  better  at  home,  and  the  services 
of  transporters  utilized  to  better  advantage. 
This  does  not  occur  from  choice.  It  occurs,  be- 
cause it  is  the  business  of  monopolists  to  absorb 
the  people's  means,  crush  presumptive  rivals,  and 
concentrate  industries  to  suit  their  inclinations. 
Give  people  freedom  and  their  earnings,  and  local- 
ization of  industries  would  take  place,  because 
cheaper,  and  because  there  would  be  funds  at 
home  for  the  work. 

Fair  terms  would  not  only  give  us  home  in- 
dustries but  would  also  work  a  radical  difterence 
in  the  plan  of  founding  industries.  People  would 
not  begger  themselves  and  transmit  burdens  to 
succeeding  generations  in  the  vain  attempt  to 
build  up  their  vicinities.  Why.^  Fair  dealing  en- 
riches everywhere,  and  plentious  capital,  anxious 
for  investment,  would   be  willing  to  -pay  for  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  213 

privilege  of  anchoring  itself  where  the  prosperity 
of  the  people  guaranteed  good  patronage.  A 
people  able  to  buy  is  the  sufficient,  the  best  en- 
ticer  of  capital. 

Are  not  bonds  of  aid  a  superfluous  tribute  to 
greed.'*  Would  capital  be  idle  if  people  refused 
such  aid.^  Is  money  less  anxious  to  get  into  in- 
vestment than  the  people  are  to  have  the  invest- 
ment.'* Does  a  bond  add  a  cent  to  the  money 
keen  for  investment.^  Between  the  offer  of  bonds 
everywhere,  and  the  refusal  of  them  ever3'where, 
would  any  difference  be  made  in  the  general  lo- 
cating of  industries.^  And  do  the  founders  of 
industries  advance  their  own  welfare  b}'  impov- 
erishing their  prospective  patrons  through  bonded 
indebtednesses  }  A  study  of  these  questions,  it 
appears  to  me,  should  lead  us  into  conduct  widely 
different  from  what  it  is. 

BORN    MONEY    MAKERS. 

Some  people  entertain  the  idea  that  the  hand- 
ling of  riches  is  the  gift  of  the  few,  and  that  the 
quick-bred  millionaires  of  the  day  have  invariably 
made  their  money  by  fair  and  square  contests 
with  nature,  as  opposed  to  exacting  it  from  ofT 
their  fellows.  As  to  natural  gift,  I  admit  that 
fitness  of  personal  endowment  will  help  an  indi- 
vidual in  his  business,  but  I  hold  that    training  is 


214  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

the  main  essential  for  the  successful  handling  of 
wealth,  as  it  is  for  the   successful   doing   of  any- 
thing else.    Rear  one  in  the  use  and  employment 
of  wealth,  and  he  will  know     how  to  take  care 
of  it;  and  what  to  do  with  it.    On  the  other  hand 
bequeath  a  large  sum  to  a  person  who  has  neve^ 
had  control  of  more  than  a  little,  and  the  chances 
are   largely  on  the  side  of  his  misapplying,  and 
thereby  letting  a  portion  of  it   slip  away  from 
him.     The  banker  would  hardly  make  a  success 
from  the  bejjinino^  at  the  new  business   of  mer- 
chandizing,  and  the  railroad   magnate  would  fail 
as  ignobly  at  tr3'ing  to  run  a  truck  patch  as  the 
truck  raiser  would  in   trying  to  boss  a  railroad. 
Managing   capital  is  a  trade  like  anything  else. 
To  credit  our  quick-made  railroad  and  manufac- 
turinor  masters  with  beino^  the  ^latiwal  starters  of 
themselves,    is    to   forget  what    have    been  the 
mushroom  productions  of  our  land  grants,  bonded 
aids,  monied  gifts,  and  tariff  taxes  that  have  re- 
.-   quired  no   higher  sort  of   genius  in  individuals 
than    willinsfness   to    receive.       If  there  lived  in 
this  world  individuals    who    could  extract  from 
nature  hundreds  of  times  faster  than  the  gene- 
rality of  persons,  we  would  get  demonstration  of 
the   fact   in   such   a   way  as  would  convince  us. 
We  would  see  men  take  hold  of  a  machine  and 
make  it  to  produce  a  hundred   fold  in  excess  of 
what    was    accomplished  b}''   ordinary  persons. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  215 

The  land  would  be  made  by  some  of  these 
extraordinary  men  to  produce  its  thousands  of 
bushels,  where  common  culture  brought  forth  less 
than  hundreds  of  bushels.  Such  results  we  never 
see,  however,  and  therefore  cannot  grant  that 
there  is  more  difference  in  the  capacities  of  men 
to  fairly  enrich  themselves  than  that  incident  to 
ordinary  variety. 

LET    us    SEE    ARIGHT. 

Let  us  know  that  we  earn  to  live  and  do  not 
live  to  earn.  Let  us  know  that  we  save  capital 
not  to  look  at,  but  to  assist  us  in  getting  more 
upon  which  to  live.  Let  the  capitalists  know 
that  capital  can  get  the  mastery  of  man.  When 
railroads  and  manufactories  have  become  so  over- 
grown as  to  require  all  that  can  be  earned  with 
them  by  the  most  vigorous  extortion  to  keep 
them  in  form  and  repair,  then  will  the  owners  of 
railroads  and  manufactories  be  capital  poor. 
Then  will  the}'  be  upon  the  verge  of  self -disaster. 
Then  will  an  adverse  season  bring  on  famine  and 
start  the  nation  in  a  body  to  weakness  and 
decline. 

Looked  at  from  the  money  making  point  of 
view  alone,  the  capitalist  has  nothing  to  gain  by 
getting  the  better  of  the  people.  For  by  so  doing 
he  destroys  the  prosperity  of  the  very  class  upon 
whose  prosperity  his    own  prosperity   depends. 


2l6  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

To  whom  is  he  going  to  sell  among  a  people  who 
have  been  deprived  of  their  means  of  buying? 
How  is  he  going  to  make  an  industry  pay  in  a 
country  void  of  other  industries  to  correspond 
and  keep  up  trade  to  match  ?  Let  us  understand 
that  the  plagues  which  harrass  us  arise  purely  from 
plethorea  versus  dearth  and  that  the  remedy  must 
be  sought  in  balance. 

Let  the  capitalist  understand  that  contentment 
with  normal  pay,  upon  the  principle  of  "quick 
sales  and  small  profits,"  will  advance  him  none 
the  less  rapidly,  at  the  same  time  that  it  will  in- 
sure him  permanent  prosperity  by  providing  him 
with  a  public  that  can  respond  to  his  advances 
with  the  same  vigor  that  he  responds  to  theirs; 
that  can  exhaust  the  spare  he  has  while  he  ex- 
hausts their  spare  suppl}-,  and  that  can  keep  his 
wheels  forever  in  motion  by  keeping  their  own 
in  vigorous  motion. 

WHOM    DOES    IT    HURT  } 

Who  is  hurt  by  unfair  distribution }  Every 
/body;  the  exactor  as  well  as  the  victim.  Then 
to  the  stickler  for  the  rights  of  the  capitalist: 
Would  you  force  him  to  do  that  which  will  ben- 
efit him  and  the  race,  or  let  him  force  us  to  do 
that  which  will  harm  him  and  the  race?  It  is 
force  in  either  case,  as  you  look  at  it.    Which  do 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  21  7 

you  prefer?  Which  is  the  design  of  nature?  I 
say  you  do  not  observe  your  whole  duty  in  being 
honest  to  others;  you  neglect  much  of  your  duty 
in  not  requiring  others  to  be  honest  towards  you 
and  yours. 

Let  me  say  that  in  making  such  assertions,  I 
do  not  mean  to  imply  that  I  would  divest  the 
capitalist  of  a  cent  of  his  possessions.  I  would 
force  him  to  disburse  his  capital  in  such  manner 
as  to  make  it  of  real  and  permanent  value  to  him, 
and  to  society  in  the  future.  I  would  stop  capital 
from  getting  the  mastery  over  man.  We  do  not 
dispute  the  necessity  of  our  subjection  to  the 
swa}'  of  nature.  But  let  us  not  be  mastered  by 
anything  we  create.  We  create  capital.  Let 
us  keep  mastery  over  it. 

LEGITIMATE  FORTUNES. 

We  have  no  complaint  to  make,  as  might  be 
erroneously  implied,  against  him  who  amasses 
rapid  fortune  through  superior  productive  efforts. 
The  man  who  has  rapidly  enriched  himself 
through  a  useful  invention  or  discovery  is  to  be 
extolled.  Because  while  he  ma}'  have  tempo- 
rarily inconvenienced  some  he  has  benefitted  all 
the  rest.  He  has  cheapened  one  product  and 
endeared  all  others  in  comparison.  He  has 
enabled  others  to  use  more  of  his,  yet  save  more 


2l8  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

of  their  own.  He  has  raised  the  degree  of  every 
man's  comfort  by  requiring  less  expendure  in 
one  direction  than  was  required  before.  Thus 
we  see,  there  is  a  vast  distinction  between  the 
producer  of  a  fortune  and  the  extorter  of  a  for- 
tune; between  him  who  amasses  a  fortune  out  of- 
or  through  conquer  of  the  elements,  and  him 
who  amasses  a  fortune  by  extracting  it  from  the 
produce  of  others.  The  one  adds  to  the  aggre- 
gated wealth  of  the  countr}',  the  other  changes 
wealth  from  one  hand  to  another,  without  making 
any  increase.  The  one  helps  us  to  climb  by  ad- 
ding to  our  accumulations,  the  other  keeps  us 
from  climbing  by  robbing  us  of  our  accumulations. 
The  one  as  he  goes  up  reaches  out  a  helping 
hand  to  pull  us  up  after  him,  the  other  reaches 
his  hand  that  he  may  grasp  our  accumulations 
and  build  of  them  a  monument  of  pomp.  The 
one  ameliorates  and  sets  to  advancing,  the  other 
burdens  and  sets  to  declining.  The  differences  of 
condition  which  owe  their  authorship  to  the  one 
are  healthful,  necessary  and  natural  ;  the  difTer- 
ences  of  condition  promoted  by  the  other  are 
abnormal,  outras^eous,  extravagant.  Here  we 
see  the  distinction,  and  it  is  plain  that  there  is  no 
relationship  between  the  two  modes  of  self- 
enrichment. 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  219 

LABOR    COMBINATIONS. 

• 

I  call  attention  to  this  subject  to  show  that 
there  is  nothing  justifiable  in  this  method  of  se- 
curing welfare.  The  underlying  principle  of  a 
labor  combination,  and  the  underlying  principle 
of  a  monopoly  are  identical.  Both  are  inspired 
by  a  motive  which  looks  to  the  sole  benefit  of  the 
victorious,  though  those  who  are  upon  the  weak 
and  defensive  side  may  not  be  ready  to  so  ac- 
knowledge. They,  or  some  of  them,  may  honestly 
think  that,  could  they  win  as  they  pleased,  they 
would  stop  at  justice,  but  self-interest  forbids  any 
to  construe  the  line  of  justice  to  be  this  side  of 
bare  subsistence  to  others.  There  is  no  use  in 
disguising  the  truth  that  self-interest  is  the  ruling 
motive  in  man,  and  that  self-interest  and  honesty 
do  not  ride  together.  As  long  as  we  indulge  in 
false  sentiment  for  the  sake  of  our  feelings  so 
long  will  we  be  a  thousand  times  worse  off  than 
it  we  did  not.  There  is  but  one  way  to  do;  that 
is  to  acknowledge  the  supremacy  of  self-interest 
and  then  govern  ourselves  accordingly.  We 
must  admit  that  a  human  being  with  complete 
authority  is  an  incarnate  tiend,  and  always  will  be, 
and  that  no  remedy  that  looks  to  placing  in  power 
any  body  of  men,  in  whatever  shape  or  form,  in 
preference  to  others,  will  affect  the  removal  of 
the  evils   from   which  we  suffer.       The  remedy 


220  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

which  is  productive  of  good,  must  be  one  which 
places  all  upon  an  equal  footing  with  regard  to 
power  and  restraint. 

Labor  unions  may  plead  the  necessity  of  self- 
defense.  While  the  necessity  exists,  there  is 
justification  of  the  measure,  without  doubt,  buF~ 
wisdom  dictates  the  dissolving  of  every  need  of 
organized  self-defense,  through  the  going  back 
to,  and  the  righting  up  of,  first  causes. 

STRIKES  AND  REVENGEFUL  VIOLENCE. 

Strikes  and  the  resort  to  violence  against  the 
properties  and  persons  of  the  capitalists,  arc  both 
impracticable  and  unjustifiable.  Strikes  are  im- 
practicable, because  strikers  lose  time  and  wages, 
seldom  carry  their  points,  and  have  themselves 
yielded  to  only  when  it  is  thought  more  expedient 
for  this  to  be  done,  and  for  them  to  be  defeated  in 
the  future  by  detail.  Destruction  of  property  is  im- 
practicable because  it  is  the  people  who  become 
the  losers.  The  corporations  sustain  damages 
for  the  destruction  of  their  properties,  the  perish, 
ment  of  goods,  and  the  failure  to  execute  con- 
tracts, which  damages  are  obtained  through  tax- 
ation of  the  people,  the  strikers  included.  Be- 
sides, the  policy  should  not  be  to  destroy  the  re- 
sults of  labor,  but  to  secure  its  proper  use.  Fur- 
ther, acts  of  revenge  against  capitalists  cannot 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  221 

be  based  upon  good  cause.  For  while  we  may 
admit  that  the  exactors  have  long  robbed  the 
people,  pitilessly  starved  them,  ruthlessly  em. 
bruited  them,  malevolently  stricken  them  with 
disease,  and  have  half  shortened  their  lives,  yet 
the  exactors  can  justly  plead  that  it  has  been  by 
the  sufferance  and  aid  of  the  common  people  that 
they  have  so  done.  We  have  not  seen  how  to 
prevent  exaction,  and"  have  therefore  unwittingly 
bred  up  exactors  and  given  them  our  encour- 
agement and  support,  which  is  to  inculpate  all  in 
the  sin  of  exaction  or  leave  none  to  be  blamed. 
The  exactor  is  what  the  victim  would  be  if  he 
could,  and  is  merely  a  winner  in  a  state  of  so- 
ciety which  promotes  the  setting  of  a  class  above 
class.  We  therefore  find  no  good  grounds  for 
practice  of  violence  against  the  exactors. 

WHAT    THEY    SAY. 

"  See  what  a  magnificent  industry  we've  got," 
proudly  exclaims  the  admirer  of  the  American 
system,  "  we  could  supply  the  world  if  only  we 
had  the  market." 

That's  the  trouble,  proud  admirer,  your  in- 
dustry is  too  magnificent.  If  a  part  of  the  cap- 
ital contained  in  it  were  now  in  the  hands  of  the 
poorer  classes,  they  would  be  covering  up  their 
sterner  needs,  and  you  would  have  as  much  as 


222  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

3-011  could  do  to  supply  the  part  of  the  world  your 
industry  was  destined  to  suppl}^ 

"  We  cannot  pay  any  greater  wages  without 
losing  money,"  says  the  rich  manufacturer. 

No,  your  big  industr}^  is  twice  the  size  that's 
needed,  and  a  voracious  expense  consumer,  busy 
or  idle  ;  so  the  laborer  must  go  on  short  rations 
and  dine  much  of  his  time  with  Duke  Humphrey. 

"  But  we  always  have  paid  the  highest  wages* 
we  could." 

Then  how  did  you  save  up  enough  to  build  up 
an  oversized  industr}'? 

"A  big  trade  with  the  foreign  countries  is  what 
we  need  to  rid  ourselves  of  our  surpluses  and  to 
keep  our  factories  going,"  says  another. 

Who  would  you  sell  to  in  the  overstocked 
foreign  countries.^  What  would  you  take  in 
exchange  for  your  goods  .^  What  would  you  do 
with  what  you  got  in  exchange.^  Would  you 
give  it  to  the  public,  you  have  made  moneyless 
and  unable  to  buy.^  How  would  paying  higher 
prices  to  the  public,  and  charging  them  less  for 
your  own  goods,  act  toward  ridding  you  of  your 
surpluses  and  keeping  3''our  factories  down  to 
proper  proportions? 

"  We  do  not  want  to  degrade  the  laborers  and 
masses  of  this  country  to  the  standard  that  exists 
in  the  European  countries.^" 

Then,  I  suppose  we  are  not  descendents  of  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  223 

people  of  Europe,  and  possessed  of  the  sort  of 
flesh,  blood  and  hearts,  as  they  ?  Is  it  not  time 
a  theor}'  was  gotten  up  to  prove  that  the  God 
who  creates  the  European,  and  the  God  who 
creates  the  American  are  not  one  and  the  same 
s^reat  Ruler? 

"  The  trouble  is  that  we  can  produce  more 
than  we  can  consume." 

More  than  who  can  consume; the  sewing  girls 
and  garret  habitants  of  New- York  city  ?  No,  it 
can't  be  them.  Then  whose  powers  of  consump- 
tion are  we  exceeding .f*  Let's  see.  Now  we 
have  it.  It  is  the  capitalist's.  Well,  let  us  see  what 
earnings  are  for.  Only  two  things  ;  to  supply 
personal  wants,  to  supply  capital  wants.  The 
capitalist  cannot  consume  his  surplus  possessions 
in  satisfaction  of  either  of  these  wants,  therefore 
he  has  no  need  for  these  surpluses  whatever,  and 
they  are  only  a  worry  to  him.  Now,  Mr.  Capi- 
talist, wh}'  not  end  the  worr}^  by  throwing  the 
horrid  surpluses  over  to  the  poor  to  be  feasted  up- 
on and  used  up  by  them.  The  time  would  sooner 
come  around,  then,  when  you  could  have  the  sat- 
isfaction of  seeing,  what  you  so  much  long  to 
see,  viz:  activity  of  your  industries  and  demand 
for  your  products. 

"  It  is  '  brains'  that  gives  the  capitalist  his 
nioney." 

Just  so,  but  let  us  see.      The   middle  class  it 


224  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

must  be  admitted  by  all  who  are  willing  not  to 
hedge  upon  facts,  are  falling  behind.  That  is, 
they  are  not  earning  a  living  for  themselves,  and 
the  capitalists  are  suppl3'ing  them  with  the  defi- 
ciency of  food  and  clothes  and  taking  their  pro- 
perties in  exchange  for  them.  The  middle  class 
then,  in  fact,  are  a  great  burden  to  the  capitalists- 
The  laborer  must  be  a  much  greater  burden  to 
the  capitalists  since  the}'  have  no  property  from 
which  to  earn  even  partial  support.  The  rea- 
soning carried  out  must  lead  us  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  public  are  living  by  the  sufferance  of  the 
rich  and  that  the  rich  are  the  authors  of  all 
wealth  in  sight.  To  be  this  they  must  have 
"brains"  indeed. 

"  What  would  the  laborer  do  without  the  exis- 
tence of  capital  to  give  him  employment.'"' 

Your  Genesis  reads:  "In  the  beginning  God 
created  the  heavens,  and  the  earth.  Then  he  cre- 
ated capital.  Then  he  created  mankind,  that  a 
few  chosen  ones  might  take  hold  of  this  capital 
and  keep  the  multitude  from  starving." 

"  Population  is  pressing  against  subsistance." 

So  I  hear  you  say,  but  in  the  beginning  of  your 
tale,  you  said  the  trouble  was  over-production. 
Inconsistenc}',  thou  art  a  very  cheap  commodity. 
I  see  a  world  but  little  used.  I  see  capital  but 
partially  employed,  and  I  see  a  large  portion  of 
the  population  doomed  to  enforced  idleness,  yet  we 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  225 

still  live.  That  makes  me  think  if  man's  energies 
and  his  capital  could  be  always  employed,  and  to 
the  best  advantage  we  would  be  most  happily 
conditioned. 

"  The  practical  suggestions  of  one  successful 
business  manaijer  are  worth  more  than  the  doc- 
trines  of  all  the  theorists  you  can  scare  up." 

Well,  if  you  mean  by  "successful  business  man- 
ager," him  w^hose  judgment  has  led  him  into 
developing  an  over-sized  and  glutted  industry' 
without  looking  out  for  corresponding  develop- 
ments to  match,  and  whose  management  has 
never  relieved  but  doubled  his  necessity  to  be 
bolstered  with  subsidies,  tax  reliefs,  and  favors  of 
ever}'  kind  begged  from  the  public,  then  I  don't 
agree  with  you  that  your  "successful  business 
manager's"  suggestions  are  worth  a  shuck  to 
anybody.  I  consider  him  an  outright  failure,  a 
dead  beat,  one  who  could  not  maintain  himself 
and  industry  a  single  season  by  honorable,  inde- 
pendent and  self-reliant  effort.  What  would  be 
thought  of  a  groceryman  doing  a  heavy  retail 
trade  in  New-York,  should  he  move  his  full  stock 
te  a  country  village  and  expect  within  the  latter 
place  to  do  a  remunerative  trade. ^  And  what  is  to 
be  thought  of  the  business  tact  of  the  exactors  as 
a  class,  who  go  deliberately  about  incapacitating 
the  balance  of  the  world  from  carr3'ing  on  with 


226  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

them  an  even-handed,  quick-buying,  cash-paying 
trade  ? 

"  We  have  got  the  upper  hand,  and  we  propose 
to  hold  it,"  comes  out  as  a  last  retort. 

But  you  may  not  always  have  the  upper  hand. 
Look  at  the  foes  you  are  breeding  in  the  popu- 
lation that  is  forced  to  eke  out  a  precarious 
subsistence  amidst  discouragements,  deprivation, 
disgust,  discord  and  disdain.  Look  at  the  ene- 
mies you  are  rearing  in  the  job-hunters,  semi- 
charitists,  hovel-habitants,  hoodlums  and  tramps. 
Their  condition  favors  the  rankest  growth  of  the 
elements  of  combustibility  and  violence.  Feeling 
that  they  are  the  outraged  victims  of  those  who 
are  above  them,  there  flows  ,in  their  bosoms  an 
undercurrent  of  enmity  against  all  save  them- 
selves. Being  propertyless,  they  feel  no  interest 
in  the  preservation  of  properties.  Finding  the 
gateways  ot  responsibility  and  trust  closed  to 
them,  they  become  reckless  of  what  is  said  of 
their  character  or  their  name.  Shut  off  b}^  their 
condition  and  poverty  from  all  the  avenues  of  en- 
lightenment, from  schools,  churches,  newspapers 
and  books,  their  reasonings  and  methods  partake 
of  the  deficiencies  of  their  mental  culture.  What 
can  we  expect  from  such  a  class  but  a  readiness 
for  mob-law,  anarchism,  fire,  dj'namite,  violence 
and  bloodshed.  Such  things  harmonize  with 
their  thoughts,  their  passions,  their  enmity.  They 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  227 

appear  to  afford  to  them  the  onl}-  avenue  of  bet- 
terments, since  they  feel  that  law  and  order  is 
degradation  of  them  and  degradation  onl}'.  Is 
there  no  danger  to  be  apprehended  from  this 
class?  This  is  a  rapid  age.  Nothing  is  done  by 
halves.  Historic  events  afford  no  guage  of  w^hat 
might  be.  I  think  the  capitalist  is  as  blind  to 
this  as  to  every  other  effect,  if  he  thinks  he  can 
escape  the  eventful  wrath  of  an  army  made  up, 
in  this  day  and  age,  of  brutish  and  revengeful 
spirits. 

I  shall  not  occupy  further  time  in  elaborating 
upon  the  theory  proposed  in  this  work.  As  to 
its  correctness,  it  would  be  exceeding  the  bounds 
of  common  sense  for  me  to  say  more  than  that  I 
believed  in  it.  I  believe  no  error  is  made  in  iden- 
tifying unfair  distribution  with  the  cause  of  the 
engrossing  evils  of  society.  How  there  could  be 
unfair  distribution  without  just  the  evils  I  have 
tried  to  connect  with  it,  or  hov/  the  evils  could 
be  without  unfair  distribution,  I  am  unable  to  see. 
The  grievances  certainly  are  bottomed  upon  earn- 
ings. "What  are  we  to  do  with  our  surplus 
^neansf''  and  "what  are  we  to  do  for  want  of 
means?''''  are  certainl}'  the  grave  but  conflicting 
murmurings  of  the  hour;  andbothsidcshavecause 
for  complaint.  The  poor  can  appreciate  what  it 
is  to  be  short  of  provisions  for  present  comforts 
and  short   of  capital   to   create  future  comforts. 


228  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

The  capitalist  does  not  lack  for  provisions  of  life 
but  he  can  appreciate  what  it  is  to  have  mam- 
moth factories  and  mammoth  railroads  situated 
among  an  impecunious  set  of  customers.  He  can 
appreciate  what  it  is  to  have  loads  of  facilities  to 
do  with,  but  without  having  others  half  able  ^o 
tax  his  powers  to  do  for.  But  he  does  not  seem 
to  appreciate  how  he  got  himself  and  themselves 
into  the  conditions  both  are  in.  He  does  not 
seem  to  think  that  he  has  over-expanded  his  in- 
dustry by  destroying  his  market,  and  that  the 
continuance  of  the  process  will  eventually  render 
his  own  property  entirely  worthless  on  his  hands. 
Still,  if  he  does  not  know  how  he  has  misfixed 
himself,  he  knows  that  he  is  misfixed  for  we  hear 
his  murmurings  of  complaint,  and  we  know  the 
nature  of  them.  We  know  the  nature  of  the 
opposite  complaints,  and  from  a  comparison 
can  plainly  see  that  the  difficulty  resembles 
the  case  of  a  ship  with  its  load  all  too  much  to 
one  side. 

The  nature  of  the  difficulty  suggest  to  us  the 
remedy.  It  should  be  such  distribution  of  earn- 
inofs  as  will  establish  balance.  It  does  not  mean 
taking  from  one  and  giving  to  another;  it  means 
readjustment  of  wealth  in  the  hands  of  those  who 
have  it,  to  a  basis  of  prosperit3\ 

I  have  explained  what  would  be  the  good   ef- 
fects of  industrial  freedom  or  that  state  of  things 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  229 

in  which  all  men  stood  upon  the  same  footing 
with  regard  to  liberty  and  restraint,  none  co- 
ercing more  than  he  was  coerced,  and  the  coercion 
that  was,  being  the  coercion  bred  of  competition, 
man  with  man,  throughout  all  societ}'.  In- 
dustrial freedom  does  not  affect  the  removal  of 
all  restraint.  It  only  distributes  restraint  and 
makes  one  man  as  powerful  as  another  in  its  ex- 
ercise. 

But  when  that  is  done,  everything  is  done  that 
is  desired.  Each  man  then,  becomes  an  effective 
monitor  to  watch  over  all  others,  and  compel  the 
others  in  their  dealings  with  the  public  to  observe, 
as  well  as  discover  to  us,  fair  dealings.  There  is 
inaugurated  mutual  interchange  of  watchfulness 
and  check,  mutual  bargaining,  mutual  privilege 
to  accept  or  reject,  the  absence  of  any  who  has 
more  power  to  dictate  than  others.  Society  under 
such  terms  becomes  a  self-regulating  machine, 
valuable  because  effective  for  good,  and  because 
it  relieves  people  of  the  necessity  of  forming,  for 
the  prevention  of  encroachment,  restrictive  mea- 
sures that,  it  has  before  been  shown,  are  after  all, 
unavailing. 

How  are  we  going  to  have  this  mutual  inter- 
change of  privileges  and  forces,  this  free  compe- 
tition ?  Do  away  with  the  fundamental  instrumen- 
talities by  which  unfair  distribution  is  executed. 
What   are    the    fundamental  instrumentalities.'' 


230  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

Unfair  taxation  and  unfair  exchange.  To  pre- 
vent unfair  taxation  we  must  substitute  fair  tax- 
ation by  positive  resolve  and  enactment.  To 
prevent  unfair  exchange  wp  must  provide  for  the 
abolishment  of  the  instruments  of  unfair  ex- 
change which  are  monopolies.  To  provide  iot 
the  abolishment  of  these  we  must  work  through 
the  medium  of  self-interest  and  make  it  more 
profitable,  at  sight^  to  not  monopolize  than  to 
monopolize.  By  so  doing  we  prepare  to  effect 
through  the  operations  of  natural  law  what  we 
can  never  hope  to  effect  by  artificial  law. 

We  place  ourselves  in  such  an  attitude  toward 
our  self-interest  that  as  we  are  actuated  by  it  so 
is  it  best  for  society  that  we  should  be  actuated. 


CHAPTER   X. 


THE    REMEDY. 


The  remedy  for  unfair  distribution  and  its  at- 
tendant evils  is  to  be  sought  in  taxation  of  capi- 
tal at  increased  percentages  along  with  increased 
worths,  as  it  exists  under  single  managements  or 
pools. 

TABLES. 

For  the  purpose  of  illustration,  I  present  some 
tables  showing  plans  of  increasing  the  taxation 
of  properties  along  with  increases  in  the  valua- 
tions of  properties.  The  tables  may  not  embrace 
the  best  forms  that  could  be  devised  for  the  pur- 
pose they  are  designed  to  effect,  but  I  present 
them  in  the  interests,  subsidiarily,  of  method, 
uniformit}'  and  ease  of  calculation.  We  first  as- 
sume that  the  revenue  needs,  in  a  specific  case, 
subjects  the  capital  of  $i,oooeven,  to  a  rate  per 
cent,   of  tax  equalling  one  cent  upon  the  dollar. 


232 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


Then  we  consider  $i,ooo  to  be  a  unit  of  valua- 
tion, doubling  and  trebling  itself,  and  so  on.  We 
add  one-tenth  of  a  cent  tax  when  the  capital  ex- 
ceeds $i,ooo,  and  does  not  exceed  $2,000;  two- 
tenths  of  a  cent  when  it  exceeds  $2,000,  and  not 
$3,000,  the  process  being  kept  up  as  is  showft. 
The  tables  are  constructed  with  the  use  of  even 
valuations  treated,  in  all  cases  except  the  last, 
as  if  they  embraced  more  than  their  even  valu- 
ations. The  tax  upon  fractional  parts,  which 
are  fractional  parts  of  the  unit  of  increase^  may 
be  obtained  by  getting  a  half,  third  or  fourth  of 
the  tax  of  the  unit,  at  the  rate  of  tax  it  bears, 
according  as  the  fraction  is  a  half,  third  or  fourth 
of  that  unit. 


Values 

Rates  on 

the 

Taxes  on 

Total  even 

Taxed. 

Dollar. 

each  ^1,000. 

Taxes . 

$  1,000 

I     i-io  cents. 

$11  00 

$11  00 

2,000 

I    2-10 

<( 

12  00 

24  00 

3,000 

I    3-10 

<( 

13  00 

39  00 

4,000 

I    4-10 

<( 

14  00 

56  00 

5,000 

I    5-10 

(< 

15  00 

75  00 

6,000 

I    6-10 

(( 

16  00 

96  00 

7,000 

I    7-10 

<( 

17  00 

119  00 

8,000 

I    8-10 

<i 

18  00 

144   CO 

Q,000 

I    9-10 

(1 

19  00 

171  00 

10,000 

2 

tt 

20  00 

200  00 

Subject  to  this  rate,  the  party  with  the  capital 
of  $2,250  pays  one-fourth  more  than  $11.00,  or 
$i3-75-       The   party  with  a  capital  of  $2,500 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  233 

pays,  for  the  $500,  one-half  of  what  he  pays  upon 
$1,000  at  the  $2,000  rate,  or  $6.00,  and  upon 
all  $30.00.  So,  for  other  fractions.  The  last 
sum,  $10,000,  being  that  and  no  more,  pays  at 
the  even  rate  of  two  cents  on  the  dollar.  As 
soon  as  $100,  or  any  other  fraction  of  a  unit,  is 
added,  then  it  and  the  fraction  become  liable  for 
an  increase,  next  above,  of  tax. 

Here  is  another  table  showing  less  speed  of 
variation  and  increase  in  the  tax.  It  taxes  each 
person  the  same  upon  the  first  $1,000  worth  of 
capital.  Then  it  raises  the  rate  upon  his  second 
$1,000  w^orth,  does  so  again  upon  his  third 
$1,000  worth,  and  proceeds  so  to  the  end: 


Rates  on  the 

Values  Taxed. 

Di 

oUar. 

Taxes. 

First 

$1,000 

I  i-io  cents. 

$11  00 

Second 

1,000 

I  2-10 

(( 

12  00 

Third 

1,000 

I  3-10 

« 

13  00 

Fourth 

1,000 

I  4-10 

(( 

14  00 

Fifth 

1,000 

I  5-10 

K 

15  00 

Sixth 

1,000 

I  6-10 

(f 

16  00 

Seventh 

1,000 

I  7-10 

« 

17  00 

Eighth 

1,000 

I  8-10 

<( 

1800 

Ninth 

1,000 

1  9  10 

(( 

19  00 

Tenth 

1,000 

2 

« 

2000 

Subject  to  this  rate  the  operator  with  a  $1000 
capital  pays  $11.00  while  the  operator  with 
$2,000  pays  $23.00,  and  the  operator  with  v$3,ooo 
pays  $36.00  and  the  others  pay  as  simple  addition 


234 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


will  show,  fractional  parts  not  considered.  Ex- 
perience must  demonstrate  what  rate  of  increase 
is  the  best. 

Let  us  suppose  that  only  three-fourths  of  what 
the  above  tables  will  produce  is  the  amount  of 
revenue  required.  Then,  beginning  with  a^ 
$10,000  plus  valuation,  and  using  $10,000  as  the 
unit  of  increase,  and  appl3'ing  the  rate  per  cent 
of  speedier  increase,  we  have  as  follows: 


Values 

Rates  on  the 

Tax  on 

Total  even 

Taxed. 

Dollar, 

each  $10,000. 

Taxes. 

$  10,000 

3-4  of  2  i-io  cents. 

$15750 

$  157  50 

20,000 

3-4"of  2  2-10 

ii 

165  00 

33000 

30,000 

3-4  of  2  3-10 

(I 

17250 

51750 

40,000 

3-4  of  2  4-10 

<( 

180  00 

720  00 

50,000 

3-4  of  2  5-10 

« 

187  50 

93750 

60,000 

3-4  of  2  6-10 

!• 

195  00 

1,170  00 

70,000 

3-4  of  2  7-10 

U 

202  50 

1,417  50 

80,000 

3-4  of  2  8-10 

It 

210  00 

1,680  00 

90,000 

3-4  of  2  9-10 

« 

217  50 

1,-957  50 

100,000 

3-4  of  3 

il 

225  00 

2,250  00 

To  get  the  tax  find  the  full  amount  and  take 
three-fourths  of  it. 

Let  us  suppose  that  instead  of  three-fourths 
being  required,  a  half  more  is  required.  Then 
beginning  with  $100,000  plus  and  using  $100,000 
as  the  unit  of  increase  and  employing  the  rate  pei» 
cent  of  slower  increase,  we  have  as  follows : 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


235 


Values  Taxed. 

First 

$100,000 

Second 

100,000 

Third 

100,000 

Fourth 

100,000 

Fifth 

100,000 

Sixth 

100,000 

Seventh 

100,000 

Eighth 

100,000 

Ninth 

100,000 

Tenth 

100,000 

Rates  on  the  Dollar. 
I  1-2  times  3  i-io  cents. 
I  1-2  times  3  2-10     " 
I  1-2  times  3  3-10 
I  1-2  times  3  4-10 
I  1-2  times  3  5-10 
1  1-2  times  3  6-10 
I  1-2  times  3  7-10 
I  1-2  times  3  8-10 
I  1-2  times  3  9-10 
I  1-2  times  4 


(( 

(t 

(I 

({ 

t( 

tt 

If 

«« 


Taxes. 
^4,650  00 
4,800  00 
4,950  00 
5,100  00 
5,250  00 
5,4ou  00 
5,550  00 
5,700  00 
5,850  00 
6,000  00 


Rapid  rate  to  put  an  end  to  the  big  pools. 


Values 

,    Rates  on  the 

Taxes  on  each 

Total  even 

Taxed. 

Dollar. 

$1 

,000,000. 

Taxes. 

S  1,000,000 

4  I-IO 

cents. 

$41,000 

$  41,000 

2,000,000 

4  2-10 

ti 

42,000 

84,000 

3,000,000 

43-10 

u 

43,000 

129,000 

4,000,000 

44-10 

« 

44,000 

156,000 

5,000,000 

45-10 

<( 

45,000 

225,000 

6,000.000 

4  6-10 

<l 

46,000 

276,000 

7,000,000 

47-10 

« 

47,000 

329,000 

8,000,000 

48-10 

tt 

48,000 

384,000 

9,000,000 

49-10 

M 

49,000 

441,000 

10,000,000 

45 

« 

50,000 

500,000 

This  looks  like  a  heavy  rate  of  taxation,  but 
how  many  of  the  ordinary  farmers  and  mer- 
chants are  there  who  have  to  pay  even  a  hig^her 
rate  than  this?  Go  and  examine  your  tax 
receipts. 

Taxation  upon  this  plan  I  have  denominated 
"  fair,"  partly  because  I  had  need  to  make  use 
of  some  distinguishing  term  of  reference,  anj 


236 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


partly  because  I  believe  the  object  sought  by  it 
justifies  the  use  of  the  term. 

Fair  taxation  I  believe  to  be  a  justifiable  re- 
sort of  man  for  the  profit  of  himself.  My  reason 
is  that  it  would  affect  the  well-being  and  hap- 
piness of  man  How?  By  opening  the  way  to 
industrial  freedom,  whence  would  proceed  free 
competition  with  all  its  advantages.  Name 
these  advantages.  They  are  in  the  main, 
general  equality  of  rate  in  the  profitableness  of 
industries,  general  equality  of  supply  with  de- 
mand, general  equality  of  reward  with  earnings, 
constant  activity  of  energy  and  capital  and  rapid 
and  uniform  progress  of  the  human  race.  The 
special  process  by  which  these  ends  would  be 
reached  has  been  treated  upon  in  the  body  of 
this  work.  But  I  shall  try  to  indicate  a  little 
further  what  would  be  some  of  the  intermediate 
steps  toward  that  final  and  proper  adjustment 
of  affairs  which  it  is  the  province  of  fair  taxation 
to  accomplish. 

It  will  not  be  denied  that  the  order  of  the  day 
and  age  is  the  centralization  of  capital  into  the 
form  of  monopolies,  the  provocative  being,  as  I 
claim,  false  taxation.  What  we  want,  I  claim 
again,  is  the  discouragment  of  such  centralization? 
and  the  resolving  back  to  a  state  of  normalcy,  that 
capital  which  now  exists  in  the  form  of  mono- 
polies.    Fair  taxation  would  place  the  forces  of 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  237 

normalization  in  the  ascendency — stop  further 
combination  of  industries  into  the  form  of  mono- 
poHes,  and  reduce  existing  concerns  of  the  kind 
to  a  state  of  normalcy,  afterward  keeping  them 
there. 

What  I  consider  to  be  the  normalcy  of  in- 
dustries is  the  existence  of  them  as  adequately 
capitalized  concerns,  operating  independently  of 
each  other,  and  situated  to  best  advantage  as  re- 
gards both  sources  of  supply  and  sources  of  de- 
mand.* 

The  normalization  of  existing  monopolies  could 
be  expected  to  be  active  and  vigorous  immedia- 
tely succeeding  the  enactment  of  a  fair  tax  law. 
The  motives  which  stimulated  to  it  would  be 
various,  that  of  necessity  being  uppermost,  and  I 
cannot  explain  them  in  smaller  compass  than  to 
embrace  them  in  language,  issuing  direct  from 
the  mouths  of  the  men  who  would  be  the  inter- 
ested actors  in  the  scene.  We  may  suppose 
that  the  stockholders  of  the  Three-profit  industry 
have  met  again  in  council,  but  this  time  to  con- 
sult  somewhat  out  of  the  common  fashion.     In 


*  Lumber  will  always  be  manufactured  where  the  timber  grows,  but 
normalcy  would  be  the  manufacture  of  lumber  by  many  different  com- 
panies, with  mills  of  adequate  size,  and  doing  business  independently  of 
each  other,  as  opposed  to  the  manufacture  of  it  by  a  few  big  companies, 
with  great  clumsy  mills,  and  all  joined  in  a  grand  pool  for  the  keeping  up 
of  prices.  Such  industries  as  could  be  would  be  distributed  evenly  over 
the  country  and  in  the  communities  it  was  their  purpose  to  supply. 


238  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

council  met,  Goldhunter  in  the  chair,  Longhead 
upon  the  floor,  let  us  take  note  of  what  might  be 
expected  to  compose  a  part,  in  essence,  of  their 
deliberations. 

Mr.  Longhead:  "It  is  not  worth  while  for  us 
to  think  of  contending  against  the  inevitable.  We 
no  longer  stand  upon  vantage  ground.  Indeed 
we  are  at  absolute  disadvantage.  Our  industry 
at  best  is  cumbersome  and  costly  to  manage,  our 
trusted  superintendents,  upon  whom  so  much 
depends,  are  only  half  watchful  of  our  interests, 
and  our  markets  and  sources  of  supply  are  in  the 
main  distant,  situated  as  we  are  here  upon  a 
single  point  of  the  continent.  These  are  not  con- 
tingencies calculated  to  enable  us  to  cope  with 
others  more  favorably  situated  in  these  and  other 
respects,  to  say  nothing  of  the  drawbacks  imposed 
by  excessive  taxation.  We  must  make  haste  to 
get  ourselves  as  favorably  fixed  as  are  our  com- 
petitors. At  least  we  must  agree  to  terminate 
our  combination,  and  to  let  each  stockholder  take 
such  action  in  the  future  as  suits  him  best." 

Mr.  Blockhead  (interrupting):  "Why,  Mr. 
Longhead,  I  am  surprised.  Can  we  not  raise 
prices  to  meet  this  unrighteous  tax.?" 

Mr.  L.:  "My  dear  sir,  it  pains  me  to  tell  you 
that  we  cannot  raise  prices  at  all.  With  new 
factories  springing  up  everywhere  we  must  sell 
for  what  others  do,  or  not  sell  at  all." 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  239 

Mr.  B.  "  But  can't  we  flood  the  audacious  as- 
pirers  out,  as  we  have  always  managed  to  do?" 

Mr.  L.  "That  was  practicable  when  our  ad- 
vantages gave  us  profits  that  afforded  us  a  large 
squandering  fund,  but  the  plan  is  not  practica- 
ble now.  Besides,  the  railroads  are  also  prepar- 
ing to  divide  up  and  we  would  have  to  bargain 
and  chaffer  with  a  dozen  companies  every  time 
we  wanted  to  get  discriminating  rates.  We 
could  not  succeed." 

Mr.  Soberman.  "I  cannot  say  that  I  am  ex- 
ceedingly loth  to  withdraw  my  interests  in  this 
concern.  I  would  like  to  start  my  son  in  the 
same  business  upon  a  smaller  scale  in  another 
part  of  the  country.  He  will  then  have  the  ad- 
vantages of  interested  personal  supervision — 
the  supervision  of  himself — and  nearness  to 
market.  He  will  have  also  something  that  is 
subject  to  better  control,  and  therefore  more 
profitable  to  him.  I  know  we  have  argued  that 
we  have  cheapened  processes  by  bringing  our 
means  together  in  extensive  bulk,  but  we  have 
had  a  motive  in  arguing  so.  We  are  aware 
that  the  cheapening  of  processes  is  due  more  to 
the  inventions  and  contrivances  of  our  practical 
mechanics,  than  to  anything  else  under  the  sun. 
I  believe  I  can  start  my  son  in  the  west  with  a 
complete  factory,  small  enough  not  to  be  cum- 
bersome, and  large  enough  to  contain  every  ap- 


240  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

pliance  and  device  needed  for  his  business,  and, 
with  the  wool  and  hides,  and  buyers  of  his 
wares  all  at  his  door,  be  putting  him  in  a  situa- 
tion to  sell  at  figures  to  surprise  us  and  \'et  enrich 
himself  much  faster  than  he  could  here  do  under 
the  best  of  conditions  in  our  favor.  I  do,  indee^l. 
Aside,  I  am  afraid  if  he  is  not  put  into  the 
business  and  drilled  upon  details,  he  will  not 
have  skill  enough  to  protect  his  interests  after 
I  am  gone.  He  could  not  now  marshal  a  wisdom 
with  the  affairs  of  our  business,  that  would  be  of 
efficient  worth  as  a  shield  against  the  shrewdness 
of  any  unprincipled  practical  manager,  if  any 
such  there  be,  in  this  concern;  and  the  danger  is 
not  altogether  an  unprospective  one  of  some  of 
them  taking  his  place  in  the  ownership  of  my 
possessions." 

Mr.  Float:  "  Those  suggestions  strike  me  with 
the  aspect  of  a  ray  of  hope.  I  see  the  necessity 
of  us  disorganizing  ourselves  and  it  pleases  me 
to  see  that  some  good  and  not  all  bad  is  to  come 
of  it.  Besides,  I  am  led  to  have  a  little  faith  in 
this  contrar}'  doctrine,  and  if  it  could  be  that  the 
cause  of  our  present  inconvenience,  could  be  also 
the  cause  of  constant  activity  in  the  future  and 
cause  of  relief  from  strikes  and  from  turmoil  with 
employes,  what  an  improvement  would  it  be. 
There  is  loss  and  embarrassment  attaclied  to 
tearing  up  and  separating.     But   how   much   do 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  24 1 

we  lose  now  from  differences  with  our  men,  and 
from  over-production  of  wares  and  from  idleness 
ot  our  capital.  I  am  not  much  dissatisfied  with 
the  necessity  to  terminate  our  union." 

Chairman  Goldhunter:  "It  is  a  matter  we 
cannot  avoid.  Something  must  be  done  to  save 
us.  Therefore  let  us  meet  again  and  again  until 
we  have  settled  upon  the  best  wa}'  out  of  our 
undesirable  situation,  and  may  it  come  to  pass,  as 
Mr.  Float  is  not  loth  wholly  to  despair  of,  that 
what  we  are  compelled  to  do,  may  bring  us  good 
instead  of  bad." 

This,  to  my  mind,  prefigures  what  would  be 
the  order  of  the  day,  until  a  state  of  normalcy  or 
naturalness  had  been  reached,  after  the  enactment 
of  fair  tax  law.  Industries  would  seek,  first,  to 
reduce  themselves  to  the  smallest  size  compatible 
with  sufficiency  of  capital,  and  they  would  seek, 
secondly,  to  locate  themselves  with  the  greatest 
advantage  as  respects  both  bu3'ers  and  sources  of 
supply.  Expressed  otherwise,  the  tendency  would 
be  to  a  general  planting  of  industries  everywhere 
upon  the  basis  of  smallest  size  that  afforded  com- 
pleteness, in  obedience  to  the  enforcements  of  free 
competition.  To  illustrate.  We  may  say  that 
a  shoe  factory  cannot  be  properly  stocked  and 
operated  with  a  smaller  capital  than  a  sum  of 
$50,000,  but  that  $50,000  will  suffice  to  provide 
such  a  factory  and  fill  it  up  with  all  the  most  im- 


242  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

proved  machinery,  tools  and  the  devices  for  the 
making  of  shoes,  and  for  the  keeping  in  constant 
supply  the   proper   amount  of   leather  and  other 
material  for  the  successful  pursuit  of  the  business 
If  this  be  so,   then   $50,000,   without   much   va 
nation   from  that   sum,  w^ill   constitute   the    val 
uation  of  the  various  shoe  factories  of  the  country 
The  fear  of  high  taxes  would  keep  shoe  factory 
men   from   enlarging   their  factories  above  that 
valuation,  while  the  disadvantage  of  lack  of  ma- 
chinery and  other  capital  would  prevent  them 
trying  to  do   upon   less  valuation*      One  motive 
would  be  to  avoid  high  tax,   the  other  would  be 
to  avoid  a  saving  that  would  bring  greater  loss 
in  lack  of  efficiency. 

As  it  would  be  with  the  shoe  industries  so  it 
would  be  with  all  other  industries.  Those  which 
could  be  formed  into  completeness  upon  a  thousand 
dollar  valuation  would  generally  be  found  to  be 
conducted  upon  a  thousand  dollar  valuation. 
Those  that  required  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
dollars  to  complete  and  run  to  best  advantage 
would  be  conducted  upon  the  high  priced  basis. 
But  the  basis  of  completeness  would  not  be  over- 
reached, nor  would  proximity  to  communities 
sought  to  be  supplied  be  made  objects  of  dis- 
regard. 

The  motives  which  induced  to  the  lesseninsf  of 
industries  to  the  size  of  sufficiency  would  be  two: 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION,  243 

first,  to  profit  from  low  taxation ;  secondly,  to 
profit  from  the  commodiousness  of  handlino;  small 
capital.  The  motive  to  locate  nearest  to  patrons 
and  market  would  be  to  profit  from  saving  in 
transport  costs.  We  thus  see  that  when  we 
start  the  desire  to  profit  from  low  taxation  we 
arouse  the  desire  to  profit  from  natural  advan- 
tages. The  arousing  of  the  desire  to  profit  from 
natural  advantages  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
when  we  have,  by  fair  taxation,  shorn  persons 
of  the  privilege  to  profit  by  artificial  advantage, 
then  the}''  must  resort  to  every  natural  advantage 
that  they  can  think  of,  or  see  themselves  outdone, 
and  left  to  sufTer,  by  the  more  enterprising.  They 
must  come  to  such  terms  as  will  accommodate  the 
public,  since  they  can  no  longer  force  the  public 
to  come  to  such  terms  as  will  accommodate  them. 
I  have  elsewhere  explained  the  advantages 
that  sufficiency  of  capital  has  above  superabun- 
dance and  need  not  occupy  more  time  upon  the 
subject  here.  Aside,  the  smaller  the  capital,  the 
greater  the  profit,  so  the  capital  is  up  to  the  limit 
of  enough,  is  a  maxim  that  no  one  will  den}'.  I 
can  therefore  proceed  to  predict  in  another  form 
a  general  result  of  the  influences  brought  to  the 
top  by  fair  taxation.  This  general  result  is  the 
exhibition  of  local  centers  of  industry  everywhere, 
with  sameness  of  valuation  in  each  distinct  in- 
dustry belonging  to  the  same  class.     Thus,   fac- 


244  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

tories  that  it  cost  $50,000  to  complete  would  be 
found  as  $50,000  factories.  Thousand  dollar 
businesses  would  be  run  upon  one  thousand  dollar 
bases,  and  so  with  all  others.  And  the  distri- 
bution as  to  places  of  business  would  follow  the 
same  law  of  necessity.  Manufactures  of  woolen 
goods  could  not  collect  themselves  upon  a  single 
spot  of  the  continent  and  compel  people  to  hire 
their  wools  hauled  to  them  and  their  woolens 
hauled  back.  They  would  have  to  come  to  the 
people  or  get  no  trade.  They  would  have  to 
respect  the  demands  of  east  and  west,  north  and 
south.  The}^,  and  their  brother  dictatorialists  in 
other  affairs,  would  have  to  assume  a  radical 
change  of  policy  in  their  money-making  endeavors. 

WHO  WOULD  PAY  THE  TAXES? 

Let  us  now  see  how  the  tax  burdens  would  be 
distributed  after  industries  had  been  reduced  to 
the  state  I  have  described,  or  the  state  of  nor- 
malcy. 

The  shoe  factories  of  the  nation  being  of  uni- 
form size,  they  each  would  pay  the  same  rate 
per  cent,  of  tax  upon  the  dollar.  The  lumber 
manufacturers  being  uniform '  in  wealth,  they 
each  would  pay  the  same  rate  of  tax.  That  is, 
in  each  class  of  industries,  the  branches  or  divi- 
sions thereof  being  of  uniform  worth,  the 
branches   or  divisions   would  each  pa}-  the  same 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  245 

rate  per  cent,  of  tax  upon  the  dollar.  There, 
therefore,  would  be  no  partiality  as  between  the 
different  members  or  firms  engaged  in  the  same 
kind  of  business. 

Now,  as  to  the  classes  of  industries  which 
must  be  possessed  of  large  capital,  like  the  rail- 
roads and  some  classes  of  iron  industries.  They 
would  have  nothing  to  fear  from  cheaply  taxed 
competitors  in  their  lines  of  business,  since  there 
would  be  no  cheap  competitiors. 

They,  therefore,  could  effect  a  recovery  in 
their  dealings  with  the  public  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  equalize  the  tax  burden  everywhere.  And 
that  is  what  it  ends  in.  An  apparently  partial 
system  of  taxation  effects  thorough  tax  equali- 
zation. In  other  words,  the  large  dealers  are 
not  prevented  from  charging  the  balance  of  the 
public  to  make  up  for  the  extra  tax  they  pa}', 
and  thus  to  secure  the  same  rate  of  profit  all 
other  businesses  receive. 

What  now  becomes  of  the  objection  to  taxing 
capital  at  increased  rates  according  to  increased 
worths.'^  What  other  plan  will  affect  equaliza- 
tion of  taxation  everywhere.^  How  are  we  go- 
ing to  equalize  taxation  over  all,  a  thing  that 
has  never  been  done,  except  by  the  method  here 
proposed.'*  The  circumstance  that  saves  the  large 
industries  is  the  natural  monopoly  they  possess 


246  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

up  to  the  amount  of  least   capital  that  can   en- 
counter with  them  in  similar  trade. 

How  different  it  is  with  the  middle  class  to- 
day. They  pay  the  largest  rate  per  cent,  upon 
the  dollar  of  any  class  of  tax-payers.  Indeed, 
fair  taxation  reversed  and  exaggerated  is  some- 
thing like  what  they  are  made  the  abutments  of. 
The  poor  are  favored  with  legal  exemption,  as 
a  rule,  while  the  rich  favor  themselves  with  tax 
evasions  of  their  own  making,  that  are  too  noto- 
rious to  need  description.  It  results,  therefore, 
that  the  middle  class  pay  the  heavy  taxes;  but 
as  they  can  have  no  say  whatever  as  to  the 
prices  they  must  get,  the  exactors  settling  ever}-- 
thing  for  them,  they  have  no  chance  whatever 
for  indemnification  of  themselves.  This  is  down- 
right imposition,  while  there  is  not  the  least  sav- 
oring of  unfairness  in  taxing  those  most  highly 
who  have  a  chance  for  recovering  back. 

THE  METHOD  OF  LEVY. 

Let  us  understand  how  this  tax  is  to  be  ap- 
plied. The  values  to  be  taxed  must  not  be  based 
upon  individual  or  corporate  wealth  without 
reofard  of  what  that  wealth  consists  of.  The 
worth  to  be  taxed  is  the  worth  of  the  one  indus- 
try, or  several  of  the  same  class,  which  belong 
to  a  single  combination  or  management.      John 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  247 

Thompson,  for  Instance,  may  be  a  stockholder 
in  the  coal  industry.  But  we  do  not  care  any- 
thino-  about  what  he  is  worth  or  what  else  he 
owns.  We  want  to  eet  the  worth'^of  the  coal 
property  or  properties  his  corporation  controls, 
including  all  coal  lands,  worked  or  unworked, 
all  buildings,  tracks,  mules,  stores,  and  every- 
thing connected  with  the  coal  industry  under 
that  company's  control.  And  if  the  corpora- 
tion operate,  own  or  control,  or  have  pooled 
with  several  different  mines  in  several  different 
places,  and  have  coal  yards  in  several  different 
cities  and  towns,  we  want  to  place  the  assess- 
ment at  what  the  percentage  will  make  it  upon 
the  aggregate  value  of  these.  If  they  arrange 
with  transportation  companies  for  discrimina- 
tion against  others,  add  to  the  assessment  value 
the  capital  of  the  transportation  company  also. 
The  assessment  wants  to  be  put  upon  a  valua- 
tion that  is  co-equal  with  the  combination.  This 
will  encourage  the  stockholders  to  divide  up 
and  compete  with  one  another,  and  to  keep 
clear  of  combinations  with  transportation  com- 
panies. Of  course,  state  and  national  assistance 
will  be  needed  to  cfet  the  values  of  combined 
properties  in  some  instances,  especially  with 
railroads,  but  when  the  local  assessor  has  the 
valuation  furnished  to  him,  he  can  make  the  as- 
sessment according  to  the  rule  upon  all  the  pro- 


248  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

perty  within  his  jurisdiction,  and  it  can  be  col- 
lected in  the  same  local  manner.  The  valua- 
tions must  be  put  at  real  worths,  the  same  to  be 
arrived  at  by  aid  of  bonds,  stocks  and  so  forth. 

If  John  Thompson  has  manipulated  matters 
until  he  himself  owns  all  of  the  coal  mines  and 
coal  territory  in  his  part  of  the  country,  and  the 
taxation  is  hurting  him  much,  he  has  a  way  out 
of  the  difficulty.  He  can  sell  a  part  of  his  coal 
property  and  invest  in  the  lumber  industry  and 
the  flour  industry;  which  industries  will  be  valued 
separately.  He  will  thus  be  entering  the  field 
against  other  lumbermen  and  other  flour  manu- 
facturers, and  making  himself  a  competitor  with 
them.  He  will  take  good  care  not  to  combine  with 
them  too  extensively.  It  is  very  likely  that  he 
and  some  overloaded  lumberman  will  make  ex- 
changes for  the  mutual  benefit  of  each  other. 

Industries  that  cannot  be  conducted  with  small 
capital,  as  has  just  been  explained,  will  not  suffer 
from  their  correspondingly  heavy  taxation,  be- 
cause they  will  not  have  any  lightly  taxed  com. 
petitors  to  prevent  them  from  charging  enough 
to  make  up  for  the  heavy  tax.  Railroads  are  an 
example.  If  in  some  natural  w^ay  wealthy  con- 
cerns can  keep  out  competition  and  handsomely 
put  it  to  us,  we  can  receive  some  consolation  by 
musing  upon  our  authority  to  put  the  taxes  to 
them. 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  2-J9 

Railroads  may  talk  about  the  advantages  of 
through  lines  and  the  cost  to  the  public  of  un- 
loading and  reloading  between  connections,  if  the 
roads  are  divided  up,  but  the  people  will  be  will- 
ing to  forego  those  advantages  and  to  foot  the 
extra  bills  in  consideration  of  other  advantages 
received.  Besides,  the  railroads  will  find  a  way 
to  pass  cars  over  one  another's  lines  for  the  sake 
of  pocketing  what  would  otherwise  be  the  cost 
of  unloading  and  reloading. 

How  would  the  chanfje  from  combined  Indus- 
tries  in  single  spots  to  that  of  uncombined  indus- 
tries generally  distributed  affect  the  railroads? 

Through  traffic  in  the  goods  of  particular  in- 
dustries would  decrease,  but  the  loss  would  be 
more  than  made  up  by  increased  local  traffic  in 
the  same  goods.  The  general  prosperity  of  the 
people  would  make  increased  travel  as  well  as 
make  such  a  demand  for  all  classes  of  goods, 
that  the  throuc^h  traffic  on  what  must  be  throusjh 
would  increase  immeasurably.  The  exactors, 
as  a  class,  could  make  no  better  investment  than 
to  cheerfully  give  support  to  a  cause  which  has 
for  its  object  the  development  of  the  rest  of  the 
country  to  a  state  to  match  their  own  over-done 
industries. 

How  about  means  to  meet  heavy  taxation? 
The  exactors  are  not  suflcrino:  so  much  from 
want  of   means   as   from  want  of  good  opportu- 


250  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

nity  to  invest  means.  Such  a  tax  as  is  proposed 
would  afford  them  an  opportiinit}^  to  invest  a 
part  of  their  means  in  the  most  profitable  way 
that  could  be  thought  of,  viewed  from  their  own 
or  anybody  elses  standpoint,  at  the  present  time. 
It  would  adjust  all  industries  to  a  paying  basi?: 
When  that  was  done,  and  prosperity  became 
general,  and  public  and  private  indebtednesses 
extinguished,  as  they  rapidly  would  be,  and  the 
necessity  for  government  control  and  restriction 
was  reduced  to  the  minimum,  as  it  soon  would 
be,  taxes  would  be  very  nominal,  and  the  law 
would  stand  rather  as  a  menace  against  combi- 
nation than  as  a  means  of  raising  revenue. 

Does  this  tax  possess  the  virtue  we  claim  for 
it.'*  The  best  practical  example  we  have  is  our 
tariff  tax.  It  has  formed  an  effective  barrier  be- 
tween us  and  foreign  encroachers.  Why  will 
not  this  tax,  which  is  upon  the  same  principle, 
then  do  for  us,  as  against  home  exactors,  what 
the  tariff  does  for  us  as  against  foreign  exactors? 
The  tax  is  simply  a  tariff  interposed  between  the 
exactors  and  the  masses  without  regard  to  ocean 
or  boundary  line,  and  there  is  not  an  argument 
that  can  be  advanced  in  tavor  of  protection 
against  foreigners  that  cannot  be  applied  with 
exact  adaptitude  and  propriety  in  favor  of  the 
system  of  fair  taxation  here  proposed. 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  25  I 


RATE    OF    TAX    INCREASE. 

It  may  be  asked,  what  is  the  rate  of  increase 
in  tax  proposed  to  be  established  under  this  sys- 
tem? The  answer  is,  the  lowest  rate  that  will 
suffice  to  bring  about  and  maintain  normalcy. 
No  greater  rate  of  increase  should  there  be.  To 
increase  the  rate  beyond  what  was  necessary  to 
create  normalcy  would  be  to  give  an  advantage 
in  tax  that  would  allow  imperfect  and  uncheap 
industries,  because  they  were  small,  to  drive  out 
larger  and  perfect  ones.  Judgment  and  experi- 
ence must  establish  the  exact  rate.  My  opinion 
is,  that  a  greater  variance  will  be  required  to 
drive  to  normalcy  than  will  be  required  to  main- 
tain it  after  it  has  once  been  established,  and  I 
believe  a  very  slight  variance  will  suffice  to 
maintain  normalc}' — a  perfect  S3'stem  against 
evasions  being  understood  or  premised. 

PERSONAL    SATISFACTIONS. 

I  would  not  tax  an}''  property  used  especially 
for  the  living,  comfort  and  pleasure  of  man,  as 
his  house  and  contents,  his  pleasure  horse  and 
buggy,  his  cottage  at  the  summer  resort,  his 
anything  not  designed  to  be  used  for  increase  of 
his  wealth. 

My  reasons  are: 


252  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

1.  The  capitalists  having  it  in  their  power  to 
recover  in  their  deaHngs  with  the  pubHc  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  equaHze  taxation,  it  makes  no  dif- 
ference to  them  if  people  that  have  no  capital  pay 
no  tax  at  all. 

2.  Rich,  medium  and  poor  capitalists  posses' 
sing  about  the  same  ratio  of  capital  to  their 
household  and  pleasure  property,  it  makes  no  dif- 
ference to  them  whether  the  tax  is  placed  upon 
the  total  of  their  property  or  upon  the  capital 
alone.  Each  would  have  about  the  same  amount 
of  tax  to  pay  any  way. 

Then  if  we  relieve  household  and  pleasure  pro- 
perty from  tax  altogether,  those  having  plent}' 
of  means  will  indulge  in  extra  expenditure  in  this 
direction.  This  will  make  it  better  for  those 
having  small  means,  by  incre^asing  the  demand 
upon  their  energies  and  capital.  It  will  tend  to 
check  the  speed  of  wealth  increase  among  the 
wealthier,  and  to  accelerate  wealth  increase 
among  the  less  wealthy,  thereby  providing  for 
improved  social  relationships. 

INCOMES. 

Incomes  should  not  be  taxed.  It  discourages 
industry.  Tax  the  capital  from  which  the  income 
is  procured,  and  the  capital  will  be  stimulated 
into  activity  in  order  to  get  the  means  to  pay  tax 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  253 

with.  There  is  neither  reason  nor  justice  in  mak- 
ing one  pay  a  penalty  for  exceeding  another  in 
enterprise  and  production.  Place  the  tax  where 
it  will  punish  negligence.  Then  we  have  to  wait 
but  a  season  until  what  income  is  to  become  cap- 
ital will  settle  itself  there,  when  it  will  be  subject 
to  taxation. 

Upon  this  plan,  the  farmer  pays  tax  upon  the 
value  of  his  land,  stables,  work  horses,  machinery, 
tools  and  seed,  but  nothing  upon  the  crop  raised. 
The  merchant  pays  upon  his  building  and  the  aver- 
age value  of  stock  carried,  but  nothing  upon  the 
amount  of  business  done.  The  manufacturer 
pa3's  upon  the  value  of  plant  and  average  raw 
stock  kept  on  hand,  but  nothing  upon  finished 
products.  It  would  tend  to  the  making  of  most 
out  of  what  was  had. 

The  tax  upon  capital  alone  does  awa}^  with  the 
objectionable  feature  of  inquisitorialism  and  is 
the  easiest  in  all  respects  to  be  laid  and  collected. 

MONEY. 

Money,  in  the  promiscuous  hands  of  the  people, 
it  would  be  safe  to  omit  from  tax.  In  the  hands 
of  lenders  it  should  be  considered  as  capital  and 
taxed  accordingly. 


254  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


RIGHT    OF    TAX    REGULATION. 

That  it  is  a  function  of  the  taxing  power  to 
exercise  itself  in  the  res^ulation  of  industrial  af- 
fairs  none  will  deny.  It  is  constantly  being  so 
used  in  the  taritf,  subsidies,  excise  and  in  oth^r 
spheres. 

TARIFF. 

Could  all  countries  be  influenced  to  adopt  a 
fair  tax  law,  then  no  countr}'  adopting  it 
would  need  to  supplement  it  with  a  tariff  law. 
The  chance  to  encroach  would  be  abolished 
everywhere.  Until  the  law  was  established  by 
all  nations,  however,  those  adopting  it  would  have 
to  adopt  one  for  those  who  neglected  to  do  so, 
by  going  up  to  the  boundaries  of  their  own  nation 
and  interposing  a  tariff.  Should  we  adopt  a  fair 
tax  law  and  remove  our  tariff,  foreign  exactors 
could  soon  flood  us  with  their  cheap  surpluses, 
ruin  our  industries,  get  us  in  shape  to  suit  them- 
selves and  then  exact  off  us  at  will.  The  fact  of 
an  ocean  or  boundary  line  being  between  us  and 
the  exactors  of  other  nations  does  not  relieve  us 
from  the  necessity  to  provide  against  them, as  we 
must  do,  if  we  would  have  justice,  against  our 
own  exactors.  Nor  can  he  who  argues  for  pro- 
tection against  foreign  exactors  consistenth'  argue 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  255 

ngainst  protection  against  home  exactors.  The 
objects  of  both  agree. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  discuss  here  what  rate 
of  tariff  duties  should  be  in  general  interposed  to 
give  us  protection  against  the  designs  of  foreign 
exactors,  because  when  the  time  comes  that  we 
liave  a  fair  tax  law  we  will  be  better  prepared  to 
settle  this  other  question.  In  the  fixing  of  a 
tariff  we  want  to  arrive  at  a  mean  between  ex- 
tremes which  will  not  permit  foreign  exactors, 
on  the  one  side,  to  easil}^  swamp  our  industries 
and  get  the  field  to  themselves,  and  which  will 
not  keep  us,  on  the  other  side,  producing  many 
commodities  that  could  be  gotten  cheaper  by 
exchange.  That  mean  or  the  various  means, 
will  not  be  harder,  but  easier  to  establish  under 
the  light  of  free  competition  than  under  present 
lights,  while  free  competition,  with  our  duties  as 
they  at  present  are,  would  be  an  immeasurable  im- 
provement upon  present  affairs — improvement 
sufficient  to  make  other  nations  soon  follow  our 
example,  when  we  could  do  away  with  tariff 
altogether. 

An  exclusive  market  as  against  outsiders,  with 
free  competition  within  for  the  adjustment  of 
prices  was  the  ideal  sought  after  by  the  early 
champions  of  protection,  and  not  the  right  to  over- 
charge. Alexander  Hamilton  sa3^s,  in  speaking 
of  the  benefits  of  protection,  "When  a  domestic 


256  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

manufacture  has  attained  to  perfection,  and  has 
engaged  in  the  prosecution  of  it  a  competent 
number  of  persons,  it  invariably  becomes  cheaper. 
Being  free  from  the  heavy  charges  which  attend 
the  importation  of  foreign  commodities,  it  can  be 
afTorded  cheaper,  and  accordingly  seldom  or  never 
fails  to  be  sold  cheaper,  in  process  of  time,  than 
was  the  foreign  article  for  which  it  was  a  sub- 
stitute. The  internal  competition  which  takes 
place  soon  does  away  everything  like  monopoly, 
and  by  degrees  reduces  the  price  of  the  article  to 
the  minimum  of  a  reasonable  profit  on  the  capital 
employed.  This  accords  with  the  reason  of  the 
thing  and  with  experience." 

Hamilton  foresaw  competition^  instead  of  mo- 
nopoly and  thought  in  providing  against  foreign 
monopolists,  that  was  all  that  was  necessary.  It 
did  not  occur  to  him  that  it  w-as  as  easy  for  mo- 
nopolists to  grow  up  in  America  as  it  was  for 
them  to  grow  anywhere  else. 

Horace  Greely  says:  "But  with  w^hat  reason, 
with  what  justice,  does  any  one  say  that  an  im- 
port or  tax  on  imported  iron  or  nails,  cloth  or 
cutlery,  creates  a  monopol}^?''  He  did  not  expect, 
did  not  look  for  monopol}'  tosucceedcompetition. 
He  supposed  that  there  were  persons  abroad  w^ho 
would,  if  not  held  back,  prevent  free  competition 
between  us  and  them,  but  it  did  not  occur  to  him 
that  persons  would  rise  up  within  our  own  boun- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  257 

daries  and  take  the  place  of  those  abroad.  But 
human  nature  is  the  same  everywhere,  and  if  the 
fellow  across  the  line  must  have  restraint,  the 
fellow  similarly  situated  on  this  side  of  the  line 
must  also  have  restraint. 

A  protective  tariff  law  is  an  enactment  half 
way  along  in  the  right  direction.  It  needs  to  be 
supplemented  with  a  fair  tax  law  to  form  a  per-> 
feet  piece  of  work.  Unsupplemented  with  a  fair 
tax  law,  it  isofunavail  forgood  whatever.  When 
we  create  a  protective  tariff,  and  rest  at  that 
alone,  we  as  much  as  say  to  others:  "Begin  your 
vocations  within  our  domain,  and  we  will  pro- 
tect you  against  encroachments  from  abroad; 
we  will  also  insure  you  the  right  to  levy  at  will 
from  our  people  at  home."  Or,  it  amounts  to 
declaring  to  exactors  abroad:  "You  dare  not 
plunder  our  people  from  where  3'ou  stand;  come 
across  the  line  with  your  institutions,  and  we  will 
issue  you  a  free  plunder  permit."  To  carry  out 
the  complete  objects  of  tariff  we  must  arrange 
so  that  persons  cannot  do  within  our  boundaries 
what  we  will  not  allow  them  to  do  while  they 
remain  outside.  We  want  no  monopolization 
and  one-sided  dictation  whatever;  and  while  a 
tariff  must  be  had  to  shield  us  against  the  iujiu- 
ences  of  exacting  combinations  abroad,  the  fair 
tax  law  must  be  had  to  shield  us  from  the  exists 
e;?c:^' of  exactinsT  combinations  at  home. 


258  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 


LABOR   AND  CAPITAL. 

Would  this  plan  of  dealing  with  society  end 
the  strife  between  labor  and  capital?  Yes,  by 
creating  the  common  enrichment  of  all,  whfen 
the  interests  of  labor  and  capital  would  be  merged 
in  the  same  individuals  and  leave  no  room  for 
cause  of  quarrel. 

TAX    ON    LIQUORS. 

As  this  is  a  question  which  would  come  up  in 
the  general  discussion  upon  tax  reform,  I  append 
a  few  remarks  upon  the  subject.  My  opinion  is, 
that  the  government  should  not  stif^ulate  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  liquors  by  taxing  the 
occupations,  or  give  tone  and  sanction  to  the 
business  by  accepting  profit  from  them.  My 
plan  would  be  to  license,  say  the  retail  druggists, 
free  of  charge,  to  handle  and  sell.  Then  I  would 
require  them  to  get  their  supplies  through  sala- 
ried officials,  whose  duties  it  were  to  keep  a 
record  of  the  supplies,  and  where  they  went; 
and  to  make  out,  for  public  display  in  the  drug 
stores,  schedules  of  the  cost  of  the  liquors  per 
quart,  pint,  or  however  they  would  be  sold.  The 
schedules  would  be  for  the  guidance  of  the  pub- 
lic and  the  cost  prices  are  the  prices  at  which  I 
would  require  the  liquors  to  be  sold.    The  drug- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  259 

gists  would  not  engage  in  liquor  selling  then,  ex- 
cept as  they  expected  to  profit  from  the  extra 
drug  custom  attracted.  This  would  be  putting 
the  thing  upon  the  basis  of  a  profitless  conces- 
sion to  depraved  appetite,  and  be  la3'ing  the 
foundation  for  the  eventual  stamping-out — other 
measures  brought  in  aid — of  an  existing  evil. 
Glass  tanks  for  containing  the  liquors,  and  meas- 
ures of  public  displa}'  in  general,  would  be  guards 
against  adulterations,  deception  and  so  forth. 

WHO    MUST    LEAD. 

The  question  may  now  be  asked,  who  must 
lead  us  out  of  the  evils  of  exaction.  There  is  no 
doubt,  but  that  exaction  is  an  evil  to  all,  both  ex- 
actors and  the  people.  But  it  is  not  at  all  pro- 
bable that  the  exactors  can  be  brought  to  accept 
such  a  conclusion  in  advance  of  contrar}'  expe- 
rience. The  slaveholder  contends  and  battles 
for  the  institution  of  slavery  until  experience  has 
taught  him  tlie  advantages  of  treating  with  all 
as  freemen,  and  the  exactor  must  be  expected  to 
contend  for  the  institution  of  exaction  until  he  is 
driven  to  see  the  worth  of  a  better  system.  To 
look  for  a  different  thing,  would  be  to  look  for 
what  was  at  variance  with  past  experience. 
Masters  have  always  sought  to  keep  the  ad- 
vantage, have  alwa3's  been  blind  to  every  benefit 


26o  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

except  such  as  the  masteiy  gave,  since  the  biases 
and  prejudices,  and  satisfactions  born  of  exaction 
and  of  the  ideas  that  they  dwell  upon  the  sweet 
side  of  affairs,  prohibit   masters   from   doing  or 
seeing  otherwise.    Such  being  the  case,  then,  what 
is  the  plain  duty  of   the  masses  in   the  matter,  ^f 
they  would  rid  themselves  of  the  evils  of  exaction? 
To  take  the  lead  and  act  for  themselves.     To 
look  to  self   help  for  the  way  out  of  their  ill-con- 
ditionedness,  since  that  is  the  only  help  of  worth, 
the  only  help  they  deserve  and  the  only  help  they 
will  ever  get.     Let  them   determine  upon  what 
the}^  want   and   issue  their    orders  from  among 
themselves.      When   they    know   they   have    a 
champion  at  the  law-making  quarters,   let  them 
send    others   from   amongst  themselves  to  back 
and  sustain  him.    Let  them  refrain  from  picking 
their  men  on  account  of  glibness  of  tongue,  social 
influence,  good  dress  or   st3'lish  manners.       Men 
can  be  s^ot  who  will  be  less  apt  to  sell  out  than 
him  who  thinks  it  is  his  first  duty  to  keep  up  with 
best  society,  his  second  duty  to  find  the  money  to 
meet  the  expense,  and  his  third  and  last  duty  to 
look   after   his   re-election.      I  would  say  to  the 
masses,  pick  your  man  for  honor,  will  and  pro- 
bity.   Tell  him,  you    are  the  sovereign^ho.  is  the 
agent.     Employ  him,  and  instruct  him  as  to  his 
duties.      You   will  not  be  likely  then  to   fail  in 
accomplishing  what  you    want. 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  26 1 

Now  I  think  the  choice  Hes  in  one  of  these  two 
— for  the  exactor  to  do  that  which  is  an  injury  to 
him  and  the  race,  or  for  us  to  do  that  which  is  a 
benefit  to  him  and  the  race.    Which  shall  it  be? 


ADDENDA. 


SUBSIDIES. 


According  to  the  principle  we  have  been  advo. 
eating,  subsidies  are  bad  trom  the  standpoint  both 
of  receivers  and  givers.  An  industry  that  must 
be  coaxed  into  existence  anywhere  with  a  bounty 
is  one  that  otherwise  refuses  to  appear,  because, 
in  the  judgment  of  projectors  patronage  will  not 
justify  the  creation  of  it.  Then,  if  before  a  bounty 
is  offered  there  is  no  show  for  a  certain  business 
to  pay  in  a  certain  community,  there  is  still  less 
chance  of  its  paying  after  the  bounty  givers 
have  disabled  themselves  to  the  extent  of  what 
the  retention  of  the  bounty  would  have  helped 
them  to  make  of  themselves  good  patrons.  In- 
vestors who  are  asked  to  take  stock  in  an  enter- 
prise that  is  the  re'cipient  of  all  sorts  of  aid,  re- 
presenting the  self-imposed  burdens  of  the  com- 
munity in  which  the  enterprise  is  to  be,  should 
inquire  if  the  aid  the  enterprise  was  getting,  was 
what  influenced  parties  to  locate  their  enterprise 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  263 

in  such  and  such  a  place.  If  answered  in  the  af- 
firmative, then  they  should  refuse  to  invest  in 
the  enterprise  at  all,  since  the  evidence  is  -prima 
facie  that  the  investment  will  not  be  a  paying 
one.  If  told  that  the  community  will  grow  up  to 
the  enterprise,  then  they  should  remember  that 
the  communit}'  has  imposed  upon  itself  a  burden 
tobringin  an  elephant,  and  will  have  to  contribute 
in  the  future  to  keep  the  elephant  alive  and  that 
the  two  burdens  are  more  likely  to  keep  the  com- 
munity at  standstill  or  decline  than  to  allow  of 
its  making  any  advance.  There  can  be  no  poorer 
incentive  for  the  introduction  of  an  industr}'  any- 
where, than  the  offer  of  bonded  aid.  It  is  simply 
an  attempt  of  a  people  to  entice  an  industr}^  into 
an  unwarranted  quarter  by  the  device  of  ren- 
dering themselves  more  unfit  than  they  already 
are  to  receive  the  industry  and  do  justice  to  it  in 
the  way  of  future  support. 

People  who  are  asked  to  vote  bounties  in  these 
times  of  bounty  giving,  in  aid  of  enterprises, 
should  remember  that  "bonds  of  aid,"  do  not  add 
a  cent  to  present  means  of  investment.  They  are 
a  mere  something  to  get  mone}'  out  of  the  people 
in  the  future  with.  They  add  nothing  to  the 
money  which  is  waiting  for  a  chance  of  invest- 
ment. The  money  which  is  going  into  a  new  rail- 
road, that  there  is  no  present  need  for,  is  money 
that  is  already  accumulated;  mone}'  that  is  seek 


264  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

ing  outlet  in  an  unneeded  railroad,  because  it  sees 
no  better  chance  of  investment  elsewhere;  money 
that  has  become  piled  up  in  the  hands  of  exactors 
through  extortions  upon  the  people;  money  that 
would  not  be  idle,  if  people  refused  everywhere  to 
give  bonds;  money  that  is  as  anxious  as  can  be- 
for  investment,  and  that  would,  in  the  event  of  no 
bonds  being  offered  anywhere,  simply  come  out 
and  invest  itself  where  it  thought  the  future  offered 
the  best  reward. 

People  who  are  asked  to  vote  bounties  should 
content  themselves  with  answering  that  they  pre- 
ferred to  keep  their  wealth  for  the  enrichment  of 
themselves,  when  they  either  could  establish  their 
own  industries  or  afford  such  patronage  as  would 
make  outside  capital  glad  to  settle  in  their  midsts. 
By  keeping  themselves  out  of  debt  they  would 
sooner  bring  themselves  up  to  a  state  when  new 
industries  were  really  needed  and  had  a  sub- 
stantial foundation  to  build  upon.  They  could  not 
then  keep  out  new  industries  if  they  tried.  New 
industries  would  come  in  in  spite  of  things  and 
prosper,  while  subsidized  industries,  and  the  com- 
munities they  burdened,  were  yet  languishing  in 
successlessness  and  disappointment. 

Suppose  that  A  and  B  be  rival  towns.  A  firm 
of  pork  packers,  we  will  say,  do  not  think  that 
the  sales  of  pork  in  these  two  towns  and  territory 
round   about  would   justif}^  their  going  into  the 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  265 

packing  business  in  either  town.  They  will 
erect  a  packing  house,  however,  in  the  one  of 
these  two  towns  which  will  donate  them  $20,000. 
Which  would  it  be  best  for  A  to  do,  to  raise  the 
donation  herself  or  to  encourage  B  to  raise  it? 
Let  us  follow  and  see.  If  A  issues  $20,000  in 
bonds  and  presents  them  to  the  tirm  she  will  in 
due  time  have  the  debt  and  the  packing  house. 
She  will  also  have  an  influx  of  100  laborers  who 
will  patronize  the  stores  and  an  influx  of  a  pro- 
portional number  of  new  stores  to  share  the  in- 
crease of  patronage.  She  will  further  have  a 
packing  house  that  is  not  a  paying  institution, 
since  the  issue  of  bonds  by  the  town  of  A  did 
not  tend  to  increase  the  demand  for  pork  in  A 
and  B,  and  territory  contiguous.  Which  place  is 
the  best  off.'*  A  who  bribed  the  packing  house  to 
settle  within  her  limits  or  B  who  did  not.?  If  you 
agree  with  me  that  B  is  the  best  off  then  you 
will  agree  with  me  that  when  an  industry  cannot 
see  its  way  clear  to  make  itself  pay  in  a  cenain 
quarter  without  a  bribe  then  it  had  better  not  be 
encouraged  to  come.  You  will  also  agree  with 
me  that  when  a  town  thinks  of  bribing:  an  in- 
dustr}"  to  settle  within  her  limits,  then  neigh- 
boring towns  will  do  well  to  stand  off  and  let  her 
bribe.  They  will  get  the  bcnctlt  of  having  the 
industry  within  reach  of  them  without  becoming 
the  immediate  burden  bearers  of  it. 


266  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION 

This  illustration  applies  in  a  case  where  the 
demand  for  the  articles  proposed  to  be  manu- 
factured is  not  sufficiently  strong  to  insure  pros- 
perity to  the  industry  proposed  to  be  established. 
Then  if  we  appl}'  it  to  a  case  where  a  monopolied 
institution  away  off  somewhere,  has  it  in  its  power- 
to  flood  the  markets  contiguous  to  the  new  in- 
dustry, or  to  get  railroad  discrimination  against 
it,  for  the  purpose  of  ruining  the  new  firm,  we  will 
find  that  A  is  infinitely  worse  oft'  than  B,  since 
she  will  soon  have  in  return  for  her  bribe,  noth- 
ing but  a  bonded  debt,  a  big  rat.,  harbor  and  an 
overgrowth  of  population  and  business  houses. 

Apply  the  case  to  a  railroad,  the  purpose  of 
the  managers  of  which  is  to  drain  the  countr}' 
throujjh  which  it  runs  of  evervthino-  the  inhabi- 
tants  can  produce  except  a  meager  living,  and 
we  have  an  example  of  the  highest  sort  of  fool- 
ishness in  a  people  who  have  bonded  their  towns 
and  townships  for  the  sake^  as  they  were  made  to 
believe,  of  getting  the  road.  They  have  fixed 
themselves  so  as  to  be  without  an}'  chance  what- 
ever for  future  improvement.  While  to  have 
refused  bonds  could  not  have  resulted  in  material, 
if  any,  change  of  course  in  the  road,  yet  it  would 
have  been  better,  could  it  have  been  done,  to 
have  kept  the  road  out  of  the  country  altogether 
than  to  get  it  in  with  a  deadening  bribe.  Pre- 
ferably  to  admitting  into    a    country    railways 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  267 

whose  only  object  is  to  suck  and  drain,  the  people 
should  arrange  to  live  within  themselves  by  pro- 
viding for  homespuns  and  home-mades.  By  the 
adoption  of  such  a  course  they  could  keep  what 
increasethey  <^/(r/ make,if  the  increase  was  not  as 
rapid  as  that  which  would  occur  with  the  aid  of 
a  railroad  conducted  upon  fair  dealing  principles. 
In  the  event  of  fair  taxation  communities  would 
not  want  for  the  establishment  of  industries  within 
their  midsts.  The  contests  would  be  between 
capitalists  to  gain  entrance  and  none  would  think 
of  estranging  the  good  wills  of  communities  by 
proposals  for  bonded  aids.  Aside,  bond  issues 
will  not  be  popular  when  the  rich,  who  dominate 
affairs,  are  principally  taxed  for  the  payment  of 
them. 


CONFIRMATORY  ARGUMENTS. 


It  is  not  the  aggregation  of  capital  that  is 
hurting  the  country;  it  is  the  monopohzation  of 
industries. 

Capital  must  combine  to  give  us  cheap  pro- 
ductions—  cheap  food,  cheap  clothing,  cheap 
everything. 

If  you  prohibited  the  combination  of  capital, 
then  you  would  prohibit  the  construction  of  fac- 
tories, of  railroads,  of  every  device  designed  to 
assist  the  people  in  supplying  themselves  with 
their  wants. 

You  would  say,  "  Live  and  do  as  your  primi- 
tive ancestors  did;  "  and  you  would  make  no  use 
of  the  inventions  and  improvements  that  are  the 
mark  and  evidence  of  our  civilization  and  ad- 
vance. 

But  you  do  not  prohibit  the  combination  of 
capital  when  you  prohibit  the  monopolization  of 
industries.  When  you  prohibit  the  monopoliza- 
tion of  industries,  you  do  not  say,  "  Capital  shall 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  2G9 

not  engage  in  industries  as  largely  as  it  wants 
to;"  you  only  sa}',  "You  shall  not  combine  all 
industries  of  a  given  kind  into  a  single  concern." 

The  opponents  of  monopoly  want  to  see  flour- 
ishing railroads,  factories,  and  industries  of  every 
kind;  but  they  do  not  want  to  see  all  industries  of 
certain  classes  monopolized  by  persons  w^ho  want 
to  make  hogs  of  themselves. 

Between  a  pursuit  conducted  as  a  hundred  in- 
dependent and  adequate  sized  affairs,  and  the 
same  conducted  as  one  mammoth  concern,  there 
is  a  world  of  difTerence. 

Remember,  you  do  not  prohibit  the  growth  of 
industries  when  you  prohibit  the  monopolization 
of  them. 

Industries  must  be,  and  if  they  cannot  exist  as 
single  enormities,  they  will  exist  as  adequate 
sized,  but  independently  operating  concerns. 


If  individuals  monopolize  a  few  of  the  indis- 
pensable industries  of  the  nation,  then  they  have 
it  in  their  power  to  absorb  tlie  profits  of  all  other 
industries.  If  the  railroads  are  combined  under 
sinirle  manacfements,  and  the  iron  industries  are 
so  combined,  and  the  petroleum  industries  are 
so  combined,  then  the  owners  of  those  indus- 
tries can  force  all  others  to  put  up  with  a  mere 
living  and  nothing  more.      They  have  it  in  their 


270  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

power  to  do  so,  and  such  is  the  character  of  hii- 
man  nature  that  they  ivill  exercise  that  -potver. 
You  cannot  persu.nde  ihem  from  so  doing  nor 
pre  vert  them  from  so  doing. 

How  can  they  exercise  that  power? 

By  charging  30U  what  they  please  for  theh- 
products  and  services  and  paying  you  what 
they  please  for  your  products  rnd  services. 

But  what  enables  them  to  do  this? 

They  have  the  exclusive  trade.  There  are 
none  others  to  whom  you  can  go  wl^en  in  need 
of  the  services  and  commodities,  which  they 
control.  You  must  submit  to  the  terms  they 
propose. 

But  can  the  people  not  get  along  without 
dealing  with  the  monopolists  and  thus  save 
themselves  from  imposition? 

Yes,  if  they  can  dispense  with  railroad 
service,  and  with  iron  and  lumber  and  many 
other  articles  which  are  the  product  of  monopo- 
lized industries.  But  they  cannot  dispense  with 
them.  Not  any  more  than  they  can  go  naked 
or  pay  taxes  and  debts  without  money.  - 

Thus  it  is  seen  if  individuals  monopolize  a 
few  of  the  indispensable  industries  of  the  nation, 
they  have  it  in  their  power  to  absorb  the  profits 
of  all  other  businesses,  and  they  ivitJ  do  so. 

They  will  render  it  impossible  for  the  remain- 
der of  the  people  to  prosper.     Let   the  remain- 


UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION.  27 1 

der  of  the  people  by  harder  work  or  improved 
processes  produce  increased  sums,  and  the  mo- 
nopoHsts  will  increase  their  demands  to  cover 
those  increased  sums.  Let  the  remainder  of  the 
people  resort  to  the  practice  of  greater  saving 
in  order  to  get  ahead,  and  tl.e  monopolists  will 
compel  them  to  continue  the  practice.  The 
monopolists  have  it  in  their  power  to  regulate 
the  amounts  the  people  may  retain,  and  all  they 
will  permit  the -people  to  retain,  produce  they 
much  or  little,  is  sufficient  to  let  them  live  and 
keep  on   producing.     Under   such   unfortunate 

circumstances  it  is  idle  for  the  people  to  think 
of  improving  their  condition. 


When  a  pursuit  of  any  kind  is  carried  on  by 
several  diflerent  parties,  each  acting  indepen- 
dently of  all  the  rest,  then  there  can  be  no  ex- 
tortion. Because  if  people  are  not  hound  to  deal 
with  one  party  alone  they  will  not  deal  with  him 
if  he  attempts  to  extort.  They  will  exercise 
the  privilege  of  going  to  some  one  else.  If  we 
had  one  hundred  or  more  railroad  systems  in- 
stead of  four  as  now,  then  we  would  have 
fair  rates. 

Because  the  people  could  pass  from  one  rail- 
road to  another  and  bargain,    as  they  do   from 


272  UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 

Store  to  Store.  Competition  is  the  secret  of 
fair  dealino^. 

But  when  is  there  competition  ?  When  one 
pursuit  is  not  monopoHzed.  When  a  pursuit  is 
conducted  as  several  different  entireties  instead 
of  a  single  entirety.  When  you  can  say:  "1 
would  rather  deal  with  this  party  than  with  that, 
because  he  gives  me  fairer  terms,"  instead  of 
saying,  "I  must  submit  to  the  extortion  of  this 
party  for  he  controls  the  whole  business."  When 
there  are  several  different  establishments  engfasced 
in  the  same  kind  of  business,  and  these  establish- 
ments are  carried  on  independently  of  each  other, 
then  is  there  competition. 

Competition  can  only  be  between  businesses  of 
the  same  kind.  There  can  be  no  competition 
between  a  shoe  dealer  and  a  grocery  man.  They 
do  not  handle  the  same  kinds  of  goods.  A  gro- 
cery man  might  he  surrounded  with  a  dozen  dif- 
ferent dealers  whose  stocks  consisted  of  other 
things  than  groceries,  still  he  would  have  no  com- 
petitor if  he  was  the  only  party  that  sold  gro- 
ceries. 

This,  then,  let  us  understand:  competition  can 
only  be  between  different  parties  engaged  in  the 
same  classes  of  pursuits.  And  let  us  understand 
that  where  competition  is,  there  can  be  no  ex- 
tortion, but  that  where  there  is  no  competition, 
but  monopoly,  there  can  be  extortion  and  ivillho. 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  273 

extortion,  and  that  when  monopolies  embrace  a 
share  of  the  indispensable  industries  of  the  nation, 
then  the  extortion  can  be  and  wiU  be  so  guaged 
as  to  absorb  all  the  profits  of  all  other  industries-. 

Against  extortion,  then,  what  answer? 

No  monopoly,  no  extortion.  Then,  to  rid  our- 
selves of  extortion  we  must  rid  ourselves  of  mo- 
nopolies. That  is  the  only  effectual  course  to 
pursue.  Monopoly  is  the  cause;  extortion  the 
effect.  The  effect  cannot  be  removed  while  the 
cause  remains.  It  is  useless  to  think  that  it  can. 
Monopol}'  and  extortion  are  as  inseparable  as 
tfunset  and  darkness. 

But  should  we  accomplish  the  extinguishment 
of  monopolies,  would  that  not  be  accomplishing 
the  extinguishment  of  the  very  industries  em- 
braced in  the  monopolies.^ 

It  is  a  popular  fallacy  that  it  would.  Many 
people  imagine  that  if  those  industries  which  are 
now  monopolized,  could  not  be  maintained  as. 
monopolies,  they  could  not  be  maintained  at  ail- 
But  such  thought  is  as  wild  a  fallacy  as  ever  was. 
harbored  in  man's  mind.  It  is  not  essential  to 
the  existence,  for  instance,  of  railroads,  that  there 
should  be  but  four  S3'stems.  A  hundred  or  more 
systems  there  could  be  just  as  well,  and  if  there 
were  a  hundred  or  more  systems  competing  with 
one  another,  instead  of  four  S3^stems  as  now,  it 
would  make  all  the  difference  between    the  pre- 


2/4  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

sent  and  what  would  be,  that  there  is  between 
decadence  and  progress,  between  adversity  and 
prosperity. 

How  will  we  rid  ourselves  of  monopolies.^ 

Employ  the  taxing  power.  Provide  for  in- 
creased  rate  of  taxation  upon  those  who  combine 
adequate  sized  industries  into  enormous  wholes. 
The  increase  of  tax  will  prevent  union  and  mo^ 
nopolization.  Capitahsts  will  carry  on  their  bu- 
sinesses as  separate  institutions  and  as  compe- 
titors. 

But  is  there  a  certainty  of  these  results?  Will 
not  monopolization  continue  and  prices  be  raised 
to  meet  the  tax  ? 

Prices  can  be  no  more  raised  to  meet  the  de- 
mands of  this  tax  than  prices  can  be  raised  to 
meet  the  demands  of  a  tariff  tax.  Against  whom 
is  the  tariff  directed  ?  Against  individuals  abroad 
who  would  monopolize  the  trade  in  this  country 
of  certain  indispensables,  and  by  a  system  of  over- 
charging and  underpaying  rob  our  people  of  all 
but  a  bare  living.  A  tariff  forces  these  foreign- 
ers to  do  one  ot  two  things:  to  cease  trading  with 
us  or  else  to  establish  their  capital  upon  a  dif- 
ferent basis  by  planting  their  industries  within 
our  own  lines.  Some  transplant  while  others, 
being  established  abroad,  rest  content  with  aban- 
doning our  markets. 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION. 


75 


Now  the  tax  proposed  would  have  the  same 
effect  upon  those  who  would  and  do  monopolize 
amongst  us  the  trade  in  certain  indispens.'ibles. 
Our  monopolists  would  have  but  two  alterna- 
tives left  before  them  ;  either  to  cease  business 
or  to  establish  their  capital  upon  a  different  ba- 
sis by  dividing  and  pursuing  their  business  as 
separate  concerns.  They  would  be  placed  at 
such  a  disadvantage  as  regards  other  capital 
that  was  ready  to  step  in  and  avail  itself  of  the 
saving  of  tax  that  they  could  not  do  otherwise. 
Of  course  monopolists  would  accept  the  latter  al- 
ternative. Capital  never  did  and  never  will  de- 
liberately reduce  itself  to  a  state  of  profitless 
ina^nition.  In  other  words,  Vanderbilt  &  Co. 
would  never  think  of  pulling  up  their  railroads 
and  putting  them  into  their  pockets.  When  it 
came  to  the  musi^  they  would  divide  their  large 
S3'stem  of  railroads  into  smaller  systems  and  con- 
tinue to  operate  them  as  divided. 

But  would  not  the  division  be  mere  pretense, 
a  secret  organization  being  maintained  for  the 
keeping  up  of  prices? 

There  could  be  no  secret  organization  without 
its  being  discov'ered.  No  set  of  persons  ever  did 
form  a  combination  for  the  self-regulation  of 
prices,  and  continue  it  for  any  length  of  time 
without  its  being  found  out;  and  no  set  of  per- 
s'ons  ever  can.      The  attitude  of  monopolists  and 


276  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

competitors  toward  the  public  is,  in  so  man}'  re- 
spects, so  widely  different  that  people  cannot  long- 
be  in  doubt  as  to  what  class  a  business  belonirs. 
And  whenever  a  combination  is  found  to  exist, 
let  the  law  be  straightforwardl}'  applied.  It  will 
have  the  effect  of  preventing  monopolization.     "^ 

Granting  to  be  facts  what  has  been  thus  far 
asserted,  there  is  still  another  objection.  Will 
not  the  system  of  taxation  proposed  prove  such 
a  drawback  to  the  aggregation  of  capital  as  to 
prev^ent  entirely  the  appearance  of  industries  that 
must  be  necessarily  large  .^ 

Not  the  slightest  drawback  in  any  way  does 
the  tax  interpose.  Those  industries  that  must 
necessarily  be  large  can  have  no  small  competi- 
tors, and,  therefore,  no  similar  industries  with 
themselves  possessed  of  an  advantage  over  them 
in  taxation.  If  an  industry  must  be  capitalized 
to  the  extent  of  half  a  million  dollars,  how  is 
there  going  to  be  a  competitor  with  less  capital? 
The  effect  of  such  a  tax  as  this,  properl}-  ar- 
ranged as  to  rate  of  increase,  is  to  cause  all  in- 
dustries to  assume  a  scale  of  sizes  or  worths 
which  amounts  to  adequacy — fear  of  extra  tax 
preventing  over-size,  disadvantage  of  lack  of 
capital  preventing  under-size. 


UNFAIR      DISTRIBUTION.  277 

Import  duties  rob  nobody.  The  importer  loses 
nothing  for  he  gets  his  money  back  when  he  sells 
his  goods.  The  people  lose  nothing,  for  the  du- 
ties go  into  the  public  treasury,  and  relieve  them 
of  what  would  otherwise  be  so  much  direct  tax- 
ation. It  is  paying  money  into  the  treasmy  to 
be  placed  to  the  peoples'  credit, 

Whereat  does  the  robbery  of  the  tariff  He 
then.? 

It  lies  with  the  home  manufacturers.  They 
can,  by  combining  to  cut  off  home  competition, 
put  up  prices  and  rob  the  people  indefinitely. 

So  we  see  that  it  is  not  the  tarifi'  that  robs. 
It  is  those  who  take  advantage  of  the  opportunity 
that  the  tariti'  gives  them  that  do  the  robbing. 

What  is  the  remedy  then — to  remove  the 
tariff  ? 

No;  if  we  removed  the  tariff  the  foreigner 
would  rob  us. 

What  is  the  remedy  then.? 
Prevent  monopolization.  There  can  be  no  rob- 
bery where  there  is  no  monopolization. 

Without  a  tarifl'  monopolists  abroad  would 
force  us  to  depend  upon  them  for  many  of  the 
indispensable  articles  of  consumption,  and  by 
overcharging  us  for  their  commodities,  and 
underpaying  us  for  the  commodities  we  gave  in 


278  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

exchange,  cheat   us  out  of   all  but  a  bare  living. 
This  any  protectionist  will  tell  you  is  true. 

With  a  tariff',  monopolists  at  home  force  us  to 
depend  upon  them  for  man}/  of  the  indispensable 
articles  of  consumption,  and  by  overcharging  us 
for  their  commodities,  and  underpaying  us  foi^ 
our  commodities,  cheat  us  out  of  all  but  a  bare 
living.     This  any  free  trader  .will  tell  3'ou  is  true. 

The  protectionist  and  free  trader  are  both 
right.  Without  a  tariff,  the  foreign  monopolist 
robs;  with  a  tariff,  the  home  monopolist  robs. 

Now  let  us  remember  that  in  both  cases  it  is 
the  monopolist  who  robs. 

Could  the  foreigner  overcharge  and  underpay 
if  he  had  not  the  monopol}'  in  his  business  ? 
Could  there  be  overcharging  and  underpaying  if 
there  was  competition?  Must  there  not  be  an 
agreement  between  all  parties  to  work  as  one 
before  extortion  can  begin. ^ 

So  with  the  home  party.  He  must  possess  a 
monopoly  before  he  can  extort. 

Now  here  we  are.  Free  trade  and  foreign  ex- 
tortion ;  tariff  and  home  extortion.  The  tariflke 
is  agreed  to  the  one,  the  free  tradeite  is  agreed  to 
the  other.     I^of/i  are  riirM.  • 

Is  it  a  choice  between  two  evils,  then.f* 

No. 

Then  what  is  to  be  done.? 

For  one  thing,  let  the  tariff  alone.     That  will 


UNFAIR    DISTRIBUTION.  279 

bar  out  the  foreign  monopolist  and  save  us  from 
his  imposition. 

Next  employ  the  taxing  power  to  prevent  mo- 
nopolization at  home.  Then  there  will  be  no 
extortion  at  all  and  all  the  good  results  arising 
from  the  absence  of  exaction  will  follow. 


For  a  set  of  persons  to  inaugurate  a  boycott 
against  an  individual  and  rob  him  by  injury  of 
his  business,  that  is  conspiracy. 

For  a  set  of  persons  to  inaugurate  a  monopoly 
in  the  people's  midsts  and  rob  them  all  by  a  raise 
upon  prices,  that  is  conspiracy. 

The  first  act  is  punishable;  the  second  is  not.^^ 

Why  this  distinction  ?  Why  the  one  punish- 
able while  the  other  is  not? 

The  answer  is,  there  is  a  law  for  punishment 
in  the  one  case;  there  is  no  law  for  punishment  in 
the  other  case. 

But  why  law  for  the  one  and  not  law  for  the 
other? 

The  answer  is  to  be  sought  in  the  influences 
that  can  be  summoned  b}^  parties  possessed  of  an 
instrumentality  for  taxing  all  costs  of  contests, 
both  the  people's  and  their  own,  up  to  the 
people. 


28o  UNFAIR     DISTRIBUTION. 

To  provide  ourselves  with  a  remedy  for  the 
existing  evils  of  society,  we  must  institute  a  sys- 
tem of  taxation  which  will  prevent  monopoliza- 
tion. 

Then  we  will  have  competition. 

And  the  same  taxation  which  promotes  com-"^ 
petition  will  equalize  taxation,  through  equaliz- 
ing the  rate  of  profitableness  in  all  branches  of 
industry. 

Institute  a  system  of  taxation  which  will  pre- 
vent monopolization  and  promote  competition 
and  you  have  solved  the  problem  of  the  wel- 
fare of  society. 

You  have  solved  it,  too,  by  the  only  mode  in 
which  it  can  be  solved? 


ABSORBED. 

[Selection.] 

Corporate  capital  has  grabbed  and  is  grabbing: 

1.  All  the  pine  lands  of  the  Northwest. 

2.  All  the  grazing  lands  of  the  Southwest. 

3.  All  the  mines  of  coal  and  iron  of  the  East  and  Central 
States. 

4.  All  the  petroleum  of  the  Middle  St^^tes. 

5.  All  the  gold  and  silver  mines  of  the  Rocky  Mountain 
region. 

6.  It  handles  all  the  wheat  and  pork  and  is  fast  absorbing  all 
the  land  upon  which  those  staples  are  raised. 

7;  It  controls  all  the  means  (railroads)  for  the  distribution 
and  exchange  of  these  things — the  primal  necessaries  of  human 
life. 


THE  PRO-MONOPOLIST. 

DURING  THE   SOUTHWEST   STRIKE. 

It  would  appear  that  a  considerable  proportion  of  the  pro- 
perty holders  of  the  community  at  the  present  time,  are  elated 
over  the  fact  that  monopoly  again  has  won,  while  they  are 
chuckling  with  delight  over  the  thought  that  a  large  portion  of 
the  strikers  with  their  families  will  be  forced  to  leave  their 
dwellings  and  to  go  begging  from  a  pitiless  public  for  want  of  a 
better  way  to  sustain  life. 

While  it  is  true  that  strikes  are  not  to  be  justified  and  should 
be  prevented  by  a  removal  of  the  causes  which  lead  to  them, 
is  it  not  also  true  that  the  sentiment  which  moves  people  to 
crow  over  the  victories  of  monopoly  and  to  delight  at  the  dis- 


11  SELECTED. 

comfiture  of  those  who  have  attempted  to  stem  their  oppres- 
sions, forbodes  anything  but  good  to  the  common  property 
holder  or  business  man  ? 

If  the  laborer  must  be  forced  to  feed  and  clothe  himself  with 
the  merest  sufficiencies  of  life,  to  whom  is  the  grocer  going  to 
sell  his  sugars  and  teas,  the  dry  goods  merchant  his  cloths  and 
calicoes,  the  farmer  his  grain  and  beeves,  that  the  laborer  with 
better  wages  would  freely  buy. 

If  the  farmer  must  be  subjected  to  a  system  of  high  freights, 
high  interest  and  high  taxes  that  go  for  the  benefit  of  Eastern 
capitalists,  who  must  buy  the  lumber,  groceries,  dry  goods  and 
hardware,  that  he  otherwise  would  have  bought? 

If  the  merchant  must  pay  a  monopoly  price  for  goods  and  an 
excessive  rate  of  freight  to  get  them  here,  where  must  he  get 
his  saving  out  of  the  few  good#  he  can  part  with  to  an  im- 
poverished public  to  pay  rents,  taxes,  clerk  hire  and  the  keeping 
of  his  family  ? 

The  merchant  probably  figures  that  with  low  wages  he  can 
save  ten  dollars  per  month  in  clerk  hire.  He  does  not  figure 
what  are  the  immense  losses  from  unsales  occasioned  by  all 
other  employes  being  poorly  paid. 

The  Western  loan  agent  figures  that  the  extortions  of  mono- 
polists bring  him  more  mortgages.  He  does  not  figure  that 
if  the  country  was  prosperous  enough  to  dispense  with  mort- 
gages he  could  find  another  business  at  bigger  profit. 

Every  cent  which  the  Eastern  monopolist  cheats  the  Western 
earner  out  of  reflects  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Western  busi- 
ness man.  There  is  so  much  less  money  lefthere  than  should  be 
left  here  to  buy  with.  In  consequence,  the  merchant,  the  sew- 
ing machine  agent,  the  mowing  machine  agent,  the  dentist, 
the  doctor,  the  insurance  agent,  the  house  renter,  all  that  class 
who  rank  commonly  with  the  pro-monopolists,  must  experi- 
ence poor  pay  and  dullness  in  their  business. 

We  cannot  advocate  the  right  of  Eastern  monopolists  to 
charge  us  what  they  please  for  their  materials  and  services,  and 
to  pay  us  what  they  please  for  our  materials  and  services,  with- 
out in  the  very  act,  advocating  the  direct  destruction  of  our 
interests.  The  prosperity  of  any  individual,  no  difference  what 
he  is  engaged  in,  depends  upon  the  prosperity  of  those  around 


SELECTED.  Ill 

him.  What  goes  away  from  us  cannot  stay  with  us  ;  and  if  all 
goes  away  from  us  but  a  bare  living,  then  the  retail  merchants 
will  have  to  engage  in  furnishing  the  people  a  bare  living,  and 
that  is  not  a  profitable  business. 

We  are  not  arguing  against  the  right  to  force  the  laborer 
and  farmer  to  live  in  poverty  and  rags.  The  right  to  do  that 
seems  to  be  so  firmly  fixed  in  the  minds  of  many  that  it  cannot 
be  dislodged.  What  we  do  try  to  show  is  the  consequence  to 
the  pro-monopolists,  who  must  depend  upon  the  impoverished 
for  their  patronage.  There  is  one  continuous  and  long  lament 
issuing  from  the  mouths  of  the  pro-monopolist  business  men 
now  on  account  of  dullness  of  trade,  and  this  will  grow  worse. 
For  the  sake  of  them  the  people  in  common  should  be  allowed 
to  retain  mare  of  their  earnings.  They  could  afford  to  give 
relief  to  the  pro-monopolists,  then,  by  spending  more  money 
with  them.^ 

At  the  present  time  the  property  holders  are  no  better  situ- 
ated than  the  laborers.  The  laborer  must  have  his  living, 
even  if  the  property  holder  is  taxed  to  pay  for  it. 

The  property  holder,  on  the  contrarjs  may  or  may  not  be 
making  a  living,  but  he  can  expect  no  help  from  the  Eastern 
monopolist  or  any  one  else  while  he  holds  on  to  any  property. 
If  he  is  shaky,  good  sales  might  save  him  ;  but  if  he  believes 
in  grinding  down  the  horny-handed  sons  of  toil  to  a  bare  liv- 
ing, he  does  not  believe  in  that  which  will  bring  him  good 
sales.  He  therefore  deserves  to  go  under.  Any  man  who 
believes  in  the  distress  of  those  around  him,  that  some  far-off 
person  who  doesn't  care  a  sniff  for  him  may  make  a  Croesus 
of  himself,  believes  in  that  which  will  bring  unto  him  certain 
ruin,  and  I  suppose  when  the  ruin  comes  upon  him  he  de- 
serves it.  If  the  ruin  of  himself  is  what  the  common  business 
man  wants,  then  let  him  yell,  "  Hurrah  for  Monopoly.*' 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  AT  LOS  ANGELES 

THE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 


MAIN  LCIAN  DESK 


Form  L-0 

30  »n-l, '41(1122) 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

LOS  ANGELES 


UC  SOUTHERN  "kblUNAL  UDnMm 


AA    000  556  909    o 


J 


MM 


''':;:^;iif''^V' 


, '  ^i 


■■,•'.'.' ■■^'/''i'' 


t*!. ':'','•>, 


'O'.aV.^ 


,  )  ,,■ 


